Yes, although, even with my decades of experience and media literacy, if I were made the chairman of the FTC today, I know that it would, unquestionably, take a decade or more for the FTC to modernize. And by that, I mean, it would take at least that long for the FTC to come to really understand how modern social media works, and how it, under the constitution, really should (and should not) be regulated.
I fully support the FTC being a regulatory body that, to a constitutional degree, regulates communications on the Internet. But what does that mean? What are the limits of that? What is and is not constitutional? It’s gonna take at least a decade before we even have a conceptual framework for it, and then many decades after that of evolution, just as the medium, itself, evolves.
For me, right now, the priority is to get this process started. Currently, a lot of of the FTC is not only struggling with its own existence, but how they can maintain their own current operations under Trump’s chainsaw slashing of federal workforce.
Are you confusing the federal trade commission and the federal communications commission?
The FTC probably has little say here, they’re largely focused on finance and stocks
The FCC really shouldn’t have the power to regulate speech because they can do drastic chilling of it when they can, using things like removing broadcast rights.
The FDA (food and drug administration) on the other hand and possibly even the DEA (drug enforcement agency) should be dealing with a lot of the things associated with quackery. Antivax is tied to quackery such as homeopathy. The fact things like mms (miracle mineral solution- bleach to drink as a cure all) and homeopathy are able to spread and be sold is a sign of regulatory failure
I apologize I must have misinterpreted based on you saying that the FTC regulates the internet, but I looked it up after your comment and it looks like they’re involved in consumer protections as well.
Feel free to block whomever you’d like though. Have a nice day.
You aren’t wrong in thinking this guys a jerk. You had a valid and polite response questioning the basis of his comment and instead of saying anything of value to back up his statements, took offense snd mouthed off for no reason.
Yeah I picked my second paragraph carefully. It clearly meant “you’re being an asshole, but I can understand being in a bad mood and being a jerk because of it, so take a breather and reevaluate your attitude or fuck off” I didn’t expect to get called a cunt like that though lol, and it was clearly an American use not Aus/UK style lol.
I’ll admit, I could’ve been politer, and irl I probably would’ve, but “rational conversation” told me I had no reason to care if they continue communicating with me.
Yes, although, even with my decades of experience and media literacy, if I were made the chairman of the FTC today, I know that it would, unquestionably, take a decade or more for the FTC to modernize. And by that, I mean, it would take at least that long for the FTC to come to really understand how modern social media works, and how it, under the constitution, really should (and should not) be regulated.
I fully support the FTC being a regulatory body that, to a constitutional degree, regulates communications on the Internet. But what does that mean? What are the limits of that? What is and is not constitutional? It’s gonna take at least a decade before we even have a conceptual framework for it, and then many decades after that of evolution, just as the medium, itself, evolves.
For me, right now, the priority is to get this process started. Currently, a lot of of the FTC is not only struggling with its own existence, but how they can maintain their own current operations under Trump’s chainsaw slashing of federal workforce.
Are you confusing the federal trade commission and the federal communications commission?
The FTC probably has little say here, they’re largely focused on finance and stocks
The FCC really shouldn’t have the power to regulate speech because they can do drastic chilling of it when they can, using things like removing broadcast rights.
The FDA (food and drug administration) on the other hand and possibly even the DEA (drug enforcement agency) should be dealing with a lot of the things associated with quackery. Antivax is tied to quackery such as homeopathy. The fact things like mms (miracle mineral solution- bleach to drink as a cure all) and homeopathy are able to spread and be sold is a sign of regulatory failure
Removed by mod
I apologize I must have misinterpreted based on you saying that the FTC regulates the internet, but I looked it up after your comment and it looks like they’re involved in consumer protections as well.
Feel free to block whomever you’d like though. Have a nice day.
Removed by mod
I couldn’t help matching your tone
You aren’t wrong in thinking this guys a jerk. You had a valid and polite response questioning the basis of his comment and instead of saying anything of value to back up his statements, took offense snd mouthed off for no reason.
Yeah I picked my second paragraph carefully. It clearly meant “you’re being an asshole, but I can understand being in a bad mood and being a jerk because of it, so take a breather and reevaluate your attitude or fuck off” I didn’t expect to get called a cunt like that though lol, and it was clearly an American use not Aus/UK style lol.
I’ll admit, I could’ve been politer, and irl I probably would’ve, but “rational conversation” told me I had no reason to care if they continue communicating with me.