this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
973 points (96.3% liked)

Privacy

32742 readers
2816 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Unnecessary and deeply concerning bow to the new "king"

Update: position got backed up by an official Proton post on Mastodon, it's an official Proton statement now. https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy/113833073219145503

Update 2, plot-twist: they removed this response from Mastodon - seems they realize it exploded into their face!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 13 points 21 hours ago (3 children)

Actually I disagree on the latest part. I actually questioned, why google and Facebook had to go kiss the ring and pay some bucks to Trump, and didn't have to do that before? This for me is a sign of a disalignment between big tech and the administration.

That said, it's very much possible (I would say likely) trump won't do shit and he just happens to have the "correct" position on this particular issue because it can be used to attack the Californian elite (I.e. dem elite). But it's a matter of fact that it's auspicable he will follow up with action on his words on this, even if for the wrong reasons.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Its more that trump is very transactional. He couldnt give to shit if corpations are fleecing people so as long he gets a peice. Its like businesses paying the mafia for "protection".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 hours ago

Exactly this. It's not necessarily that he's like a better enforcer, but he's just a different type of enforcer that plays by different rules, which is to say compromised ethics, transactional exchanges, and so on. Tech companies absolutely had a difficult time under Biden, but the way they played that game was with legal filings, with negotiations where they attempt to offer something they hope will improve the perception of competitive balance.

It's just a difference in channeling these things through rule of law on the one hand and through transactional exchanges and gestures of fealty on the other.

And I think if you think the Trump style reflects a more effective approach to handling antitrust, it's kind of telling on yourself in terms of being able to comprehend the value of one type of transaction, but not the other.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Nobody had to go kiss the ring they payed for his campaign because THEY WANTED to please him. Edit: Typo

[–] [email protected] 6 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah but why they wanted to please him? What's the benefit for them? Why they wouldn't want to please previous administrations? The other user mentioned that Trump is very transactional, and that sounds quite right too.

Either way, look at Facebook, literally went through a shitstorm to align, that is a sign of weakness in my opinion.

[–] refalo 8 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (2 children)

What’s the benefit for them?

Not being targeted by a President.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/29/business/ceos-trump-revenge-nightcap/index.html

https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/05/politics/trump-prosecute-political-opponents/index.html

Why they wouldn’t want to please previous administrations?

Those administrations weren't targeting them.

I think it's always about the money, plain and simple. If there is a threat to their gravy train, they will bend over backwards to keep it going. Otherwise, they don't care about you.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

The Biden government was targeting them, though. Kind of. Various companies were facing challenges from the administration. I think the difference is: If they suck Trump's dick enough he'll leave them alone. Biden was less likely to do that. Or probably that's their view of it, anyway. Somehow big business seems to view Trump as a "rational actor" while they view Biden as the opposite.

Something something TOS Mirror Universe episode...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

OK, but then that was exactly my point. Antitrust is one way to target those companies, hence they had to suck up. Therefore them paying (peanuts in the grand scheme of things) could be seen as the exact opposite of "they are all in the same team".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 14 hours ago

Right, I follow your take here as the one that makes the most sense. This makes a lot more sense as the tech companies attempting to head off a potentially adversarial relationship.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 20 hours ago

That's some interesting perspective, I hadn't thought of it that way. With Trump it's really hard to know what is coming until it happens, but it's nice that some people see a silver lining.