Discussion Random Discussion (No Politics, Religion) - SHOW CHIN PASSPORT ON ENTRY

[sunny3193]

I am not, have never been, nor will ever be, on social media.
So I have absolutely zero skin in this game.
But I am interested, purely on an intellectual basis, how this Facebook stoush plays out.
A monopoly successfully exercising its power?
Or a monopoly demonstrating hubris?
I suppose I will have an answer shortly.

 

[StFly]

I am not, have never been, nor will ever be, on social media.
So I have absolutely zero skin in this game.
But I am interested, purely on an intellectual basis, how this Facebook stoush plays out.
A monopoly successfully exercising its power?
Or a monopoly demonstrating hubris?
I suppose I will have an answer shortly.

Different to the Google response to such things, wouldn't discount the government being a bit if a dick in this situation though, seems they're up in arms since the kid took his bat and ball and actually walked and they were left going "but, now what am I supposed to do? It's all your fault I can't play!"

 

[sunny3193]

Different to the Google response to such things, wouldn't discount the government being a bit if a dick in this situation though, seems they're up in arms since the kid took his bat and ball and actually walked and they were left going "but, now what am I supposed to do? It's all your fault I can't play!"

The difference in response between Google and Facebook is interesting.
You might argue that is due to the relative strength (or weakness) of their business models, or maybe one believes it is better to be in the tent pissing out than being outside the tent and being pissed on.
I don’t know.
I see various arguments (pro and con) now surfacing.
Some amazingly specious ones from so called industry experts.
Either way, there’s nothing special about these two: monopolies have existed before and they will exist again, but eventually every monopoly dies.
As for the government, in particular this government, I would imagine they are facing serious heat from their media mates. That’s not going to dissipate unless they get the $’s.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

The new laws does also mean cooper is now the leading AFL reporter on social media.

For that reason alone the law is bit crap.

 

[Joffaboy]

The new laws does also mean cooper is now the leading AFL reporter on social media.

For that reason alone the law is bit crap.

Retired his page today

 

[pebblesofsand]

Does anyone else see the ultimate irony in Facebook removing links to real news while letting fake news run rampant on their platform.

Easy solution - simply ban Facebook from operating in Australia - no big drama - the young kiddies have moved on and its currently full of oldies who think they can find out what their kids are doing.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Retired his page today

Missed opportunity.

He could have been leader in AFL news.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The difference in response between Google and Facebook is interesting.
You might argue that is due to the relative strength (or weakness) of their business models, or maybe one believes it is better to be in the tent pissing out than being outside the tent and being pissed on.
I don’t know.
I see various arguments (pro and con) now surfacing.
Some amazingly specious ones from so called industry experts.
Either way, there’s nothing special about these two: monopolies have existed before and they will exist again, but eventually every monopoly dies.
As for the government, in particular this government, I would imagine they are facing serious heat from their media mates. That’s not going to dissipate unless they get the $’s.

Google actively run a news feed so there is a case for something i suppose.
But they are primarily a search engine , and it bugs me no end that i get hits that are simply not available because they are behind a paywall.
a) they should not be hits. ( how does google even know the content behind the paywall unless new.com is providing them access.
b) why should they pay for this non-content.

Facebook is not a news source. People post news, sometimes from dubious sources. facebook don't link to official news and don't claim to provide news.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Does anyone else see the ultimate irony in Facebook removing links to real news while letting fake news run rampant on their platform.

Easy solution - simply ban Facebook from operating in Australia - no big drama - the young kiddies have moved on and its currently full of oldies who think they can find out what their kids are doing.

To do that would be political suicide

 

[Joffaboy]

Charge Zuckerberg with attempts to damage the health of the Australian public and put out an arrest warrant with Intetpol.

 

[gringo2011]

Does anyone else see the ultimate irony in Facebook removing links to real news while letting fake news run rampant on their platform.

Easy solution - simply ban Facebook from operating in Australia - no big drama - the young kiddies have moved on and its currently full of oldies who think they can find out what their kids are doing.

Facebook are %$#@, The great Hack and the Social Dilemma show how s**t they are behind the curtain. Donald Trump paid his way to his presidency and depending on your extreme view point that they helped to create, that is enough to be reigned in. Again depending on your extreme view point they help to mould we need to address climate change and a changing world economy and having a divisive company profiting from causing mass friction in societies isn't a great thing to have.

 

[jwikked]

Charge Zuckerberg with attempts to damage the health of the Australian public and put out an arrest warrant with Intetpol.

thats a bit dramatic. The health pages should be all back up by now, either way - why are Facebook required to keep them up? There’s no law.
It’s funny, the same people cheering and hoping Facebook censors content from people they disagree with are the same ones whining when Facebook censors content they want to see.
I don’t care what happens with this mess, I’m tired of hearing about it on the radio. Facebook said what they would do if these laws proceeded, and now everyone is surprised they weren’t just bluffing.

 

[Joffaboy]

thats a bit dramatic. The health pages should be all back up by now, either way - why are Facebook required to keep them up? There’s no law.
It’s funny, the same people cheering and hoping Facebook censors content from people they disagree with are the same ones whining when Facebook censors content they want to see.
I don’t care what happens with this mess, I’m tired of hearing about it on the radio. Facebook said what they would do if these laws proceeded, and now everyone is surprised they weren’t just bluffing.

lol. do you think I was serious? I couldn't care les about Facebook only used it for news, will go straight to the websites. Facebook is about as important to me as TicToc

 

[sunny3193]

Google actively run a news feed so there is a case for something i suppose.
But they are primarily a search engine , and it bugs me no end that i get hits that are simply not available because they are behind a paywall.
a) they should not be hits. ( how does google even know the content behind the paywall unless new.com is providing them access.
b) why should they pay for this non-content.

Facebook is not a news source. People post news, sometimes from dubious sources. facebook don't link to official news and don't claim to provide news.

I find it interesting that these two companies have business models built on monetising other people’s data but when those other people attempt to get value for their data, these two cut up badly.
Causes me some giggles.
Anyway, this argument is as old as time itself: content provider versus distribution channel.
Murdoch had the same problem in the 90’s.
He solved his problem by building his own distribution channel.
It will be interesting to see how this resolves.
Either way, the Big Tech business models are now facing some headwinds.

 

[pebblesofsand]

To do that would be political suicide

Probably true but this is massive own goal by Zuckerberg.

He seems to have forgotten that the Democrats now control US parliament and are looking at controling big tech power.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

 

[sammm]

I ran Malwarebytes , and reset the browser. So one of those things fixed it. Think it was a browser add on,

I don't do browser add ons as sometimes they are infected.

I once downloaded Firefox from what I thought was a reputable website. It produced a randpm virus on my pc. I found a way out of it via google but never again would I do such a thing.

 

[George]

Love Facebook doing what they did!

 

[StCicatriz]

i suspect the aim with the new legislation is not really so much about forcing facebook to pay, but more so to ensure the large media players are "Advertised" and the smaller players are completely cut out of the picture

for example, once this legislation is passed, the big media companies will simply have leverage in any negotiation on price and terms. which will be settled.

there will be no appetite or need for the social media companies like google or facebook to do similar deals with smaller operators and will simply black list their presence or the smaller operators will effectively sign bad deals that will limit their advertising foot print.

these smaller companies rely on traffic going from social media into their website. that's gonna be cut now.

this gives the government incredible power as they're effectively controlling the advantage the big media companies will have over the smaller ones and also the leverage they have over tech companies.

with that kind of leverage over big media do we really see much thrust to any kind of investigative journalism or spot light on political issues for the controlling party that introduced this legislation?

all for what? was it even needed given articles are easily paywalled now?

 

[sunny3193]

Who is the most annoying character: Steffi, Hope, Liam or Thomas?
My money is on Liam, wimp of a man.

 

[CaptainRisky]

Right on Valentine's Day weekend as well.

So many restaurants, hotels, BnBs etc are going to lose a fortune because of this.

Can't keep ******* yo-yoing...

The hotel I work for was going to have it's biggest business day since covid started a year ago with 220 rooms sold , we ended up with 30 rooms sold , its killing hospitality

 

[StFly]

The difference in response between Google and Facebook is interesting.
You might argue that is due to the relative strength (or weakness) of their business models, or maybe one believes it is better to be in the tent pissing out than being outside the tent and being pissed on.
I don’t know.
I see various arguments (pro and con) now surfacing.
Some amazingly specious ones from so called industry experts.
Either way, there’s nothing special about these two: monopolies have existed before and they will exist again, but eventually every monopoly dies.
As for the government, in particular this government, I would imagine they are facing serious heat from their media mates. That’s not going to dissipate unless they get the $’s.

To me, the Google response was that of a teacher, who largely understood what was happening, how it was happening and would both work towards amicable agreement where both sides gained something, or close enough to correct answer was reached.

As stated, Facebook seemed to use the bat and ball approach, whilst knowing what was happening, how it was happening their response was akin to simply saying "Ok" and walking away never to be seen or heard from again. Because that teacher had already left to a self purposed better job with more pay and reach, so, screw the working towards amicable solutions.

What is then advertising cause by service?

In Googles case it was "you provide a link, therefore you pay", there's a direct link to the service provided and those that provide that service.
In Facebooks case it was the same, only it's an indirect link since they're not the one providing the link, their service is, but it is users of it that are providing that link.

You could then argue on the gov behalf "one is direct, one indirect, charge 50% of them", but neither actually advertise or are ultimately a net negative to other outlets providing the targeted service of news provision. Only, I do not believe they actually care about the outcome, just that as you state, their backers are compensated for the attempt and have a net gain from the effort.

 

[gringo2011]

The hotel I work for was going to have it's biggest business day since covid started a year ago with 220 rooms sold , we ended up with 30 rooms sold , its killing hospitality

I have an anniversary coming up and went to book a room at a good city hotel and worried that they are all full of sick * heads. I cancelled the suite at the Langham and booked a restaurant and bought her a piece of jewellery instead. HQ saved the hotels at first and now it's strangling them. I'm worried about it jumping rooms. Retail is the opposite, we are having the best 2 years in a decade. One guy I know who supplies retailers said he's up 800% on 2 years ago and climbing. It's a really s**t time for the arts, hospitality and sports though. It's going to take 10 years to recover to anything like it was.

 

[gringo2011]

The hotel I work for was going to have it's biggest business day since covid started a year ago with 220 rooms sold , we ended up with 30 rooms sold , its killing hospitality

Actually if I was advising the industry... offer cheap deals, I have a few alliance cards with hotels and it's still $300 plus a night for a nice suite in the city. I love staying somewhere lux, if you did couples weekends and stuff you'd rake it in. $200 a night for a good room and at least the books are ticking over. I looked at some Japanese style spa out in the sticks and they were expensive as * and had hardly anything left available. There is a market if you can find them, I have money we would have spent overseas to waste and going interstate is risky these days, you can get locked out. Most of the beachside stuff is booked out. We just cancelled but will rebook a place up in the high country with some friends because we usually camp but haven't for 2 years and it was ll that was available at this time of year. People have money but need to know what to spend it on. Get a package with some restaurant going and some nice wine on check in, and saddos like me will come and pretend we are somewhere better..

 

[StFly]

I have an anniversary coming up and went to book a room at a good city hotel and worried that they are all full of sick fu** heads. I cancelled the suite at the Langham and booked a restaurant and bought her a piece of jewellery instead. HQ saved the hotels at first and now it's strangling them. I'm worried about it jumping rooms. Retail is the opposite, we are having the best 2 years in a decade. One guy I know who supplies retailers said he's up 800% on 2 years ago and climbing. It's a really sh*t time for the arts, hospitality and sports though. It's going to take 10 years to recover to anything like it was.

This is us, in tool manufacturing not just selling globally. Locally, despite everyone having to isolate we could not physically keep up with demand for screws, bolts, guns to fire them, hammers to hit them, drills, drivers, wrenches and things to clean up and service whatever you ten demo in whatever environment you are in.

We broke monthly records for a fortune 500 company globally, only our end it was 3 months in a row whilst some of us were only being paid for 2 days a week.

Meanwhile, my sister in hospitality got told to GTFO and "maybe we'll have a job for you at a drive through" and drastically reduced all the things at the drop of lockdown. And sure, we scrimped and saved and shedded things in some sectors, but overall did well, hospitality got smacked hard.