And you may recall, the criticism I got for meeting with the leaders in Silicon Valley, when I was trying to work out an agreement dealing with them protecting intellectual property for artists in the United States of America. And at one point, one of the little creeps sitting around that table, who was a multi- — close to a billionaire — who told me he was an artist because he was able to come up with games to teach you how to kill people, you know the ——
CW: Like video games.
Yeah, video games. And I was lectured by one of the senior leaders there that by saying if I insisted on what Leahy’d put together and we were, I thought we were going to fully support, that they would blow up the network, figuratively speaking. Have everybody contact. They get out and go out and contact the switchboard, just blow it up.
And then one of these righteous people said to me that, you know, “We are the economic engine of America. We are the ones.” And fortunately I had done a little homework before I went and I said, you know, I find it fascinating. As I added up the seven outfits, everyone’s there but Microsoft. I said, you have fewer people on your payroll than all the losses that General Motors just faced in the last quarter, of employees. So don’t lecture me about how you’ve created all this employment.
The point is, there’s an arrogance about it, an overwhelming arrogance that we are, we are the ones. We can do what we want to do. I disagree.
Sepharo wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 17:51:Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 17:48:
Actually, I was simply referring to the quote clip provided by Blue -- which is what my original post was predicated on. However, on that subject, here is a fuller quote from Biden:No, I’ve never been a fan of Facebook, as you probably know. I’ve never been a big Zuckerberg fan. I think he’s a real problem. I think he knows better. And you know, from my perspective, I’ve been in the view that not only should we be worrying about the concentration of power, we should be worried about the lack of privacy and them being exempt, which you’re not exempt. [The Times] can’t write something you know to be false and be exempt from being sued. But he can. The idea that it’s a tech company is that Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms.Either Biden or his comment is confused, because he seems to be talking about Zuckerburg writing false statements. If section 230 is accurately portrayed as about the site not being responsible for anyone's comments on the site. Obviously those are two separate things. So, I agree Zuckerburg should be responsible for his comments. I think holding Facebook responsible for what anyone said on the site is essentially unenforceable, and hence meaningless. The consequences of attempting to do that would be a waste of time and effort. I mean, yeah. you might technically get "legitimate" sites to turn into censorship machines, but it will simply move to sites the government will have a much harder time doing anything about. I suspect if Biden sat down with someone who could explain the reality of the situation, he would probably agree.
Revoking 230 is what that entire part of the interview is about and what Blue's post is about.
jdreyer wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 17:27:Prez wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 13:17:He was talking about the guy that makes video games. Yes, I don't think he's a video game fan, but that's not the thrust of his rant. He's really pissed at the tech Bros, just like all of us.
Thankfully Ole' Joe is one of the final dinosaurs in the political space who grew up in a time before videogames were a part of virtually every childhood to at least some degree. These antiquated, wrong-headed views will die with him and his ilk.
And Jdreyer, how can you possibly claim he was not speaking about videogames? He literally said:... And at one point, one of the little creeps sitting around that table, who was a multi- — close to a billionaire — who told me he was an artist because he was able to come up with games to teach you how to kill people, you know the ——
CW: Like video games.
Yeah, video games. ...
I'm not sure how you can even try to spin that as anything else.
Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 17:48:
Actually, I was simply referring to the quote clip provided by Blue -- which is what my original post was predicated on. However, on that subject, here is a fuller quote from Biden:No, I’ve never been a fan of Facebook, as you probably know. I’ve never been a big Zuckerberg fan. I think he’s a real problem. I think he knows better. And you know, from my perspective, I’ve been in the view that not only should we be worrying about the concentration of power, we should be worried about the lack of privacy and them being exempt, which you’re not exempt. [The Times] can’t write something you know to be false and be exempt from being sued. But he can. The idea that it’s a tech company is that Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms.Either Biden or his comment is confused, because he seems to be talking about Zuckerburg writing false statements. If section 230 is accurately portrayed as about the site not being responsible for anyone's comments on the site. Obviously those are two separate things. So, I agree Zuckerburg should be responsible for his comments. I think holding Facebook responsible for what anyone said on the site is essentially unenforceable, and hence meaningless. The consequences of attempting to do that would be a waste of time and effort. I mean, yeah. you might technically get "legitimate" sites to turn into censorship machines, but it will simply move to sites the government will have a much harder time doing anything about. I suspect if Biden sat down with someone who could explain the reality of the situation, he would probably agree.
No, I’ve never been a fan of Facebook, as you probably know. I’ve never been a big Zuckerberg fan. I think he’s a real problem. I think he knows better. And you know, from my perspective, I’ve been in the view that not only should we be worrying about the concentration of power, we should be worried about the lack of privacy and them being exempt, which you’re not exempt. [The Times] can’t write something you know to be false and be exempt from being sued. But he can. The idea that it’s a tech company is that Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms.Either Biden or his comment is confused, because he seems to be talking about Zuckerburg writing false statements. If section 230 is accurately portrayed as about the site not being responsible for anyone's comments on the site. Obviously those are two separate things. So, I agree Zuckerburg should be responsible for his comments. I think holding Facebook responsible for what anyone said on the site is essentially unenforceable, and hence meaningless. The consequences of attempting to do that would be a waste of time and effort. I mean, yeah. you might technically get "legitimate" sites to turn into censorship machines, but it will simply move to sites the government will have a much harder time doing anything about. I suspect if Biden sat down with someone who could explain the reality of the situation, he would probably agree.
Prez wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 13:17:He was talking about the guy that makes video games. Yes, I don't think he's a video game fan, but that's not the thrust of his rant. He's really pissed at the tech Bros, just like all of us.
Thankfully Ole' Joe is one of the final dinosaurs in the political space who grew up in a time before videogames were a part of virtually every childhood to at least some degree. These antiquated, wrong-headed views will die with him and his ilk.
And Jdreyer, how can you possibly claim he was not speaking about videogames? He literally said:... And at one point, one of the little creeps sitting around that table, who was a multi- — close to a billionaire — who told me he was an artist because he was able to come up with games to teach you how to kill people, you know the ——
CW: Like video games.
Yeah, video games. ...
I'm not sure how you can even try to spin that as anything else.
Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 17:01:
First, I want to admit I did not read the article before posting. I was trusting Blue's clip, my bad. Second, I wouldn't fault many people for not reading it. I lean left and have a subscription to the NYT website and it was tough for me to get through. Third and most importantly, I think my original post is still valid.Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 17, 2020, 21:25:Now, in this specific case when the full context is known, what he said was in fact reasonable. Unfortunately, he has and likely will again say a thing or two which are not. C'est la vie.
There is so much I want to say, but it just isn't worth it. I'll stick to this -- Joe, when you don't understand the subject just keep your damn mouth shut. *sigh*
Mr. Tact wrote on Jan 17, 2020, 21:25:Now, in this specific case when the full context is known, what he said was in fact reasonable. Unfortunately, he has and likely will again say a thing or two which are not. C'est la vie.
There is so much I want to say, but it just isn't worth it. I'll stick to this -- Joe, when you don't understand the subject just keep your damn mouth shut. *sigh*
jdreyer wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 06:28:
You guys are focusing on the wrong things. He's not really speaking directly against video games, but against all the arrogant tech-bros that all of you rail against constantly: Zuck, Cook, Nadella, Kotick, Riccitello, all those douchebags.
... And at one point, one of the little creeps sitting around that table, who was a multi- — close to a billionaire — who told me he was an artist because he was able to come up with games to teach you how to kill people, you know the ——
CW: Like video games.
Yeah, video games. ...
wrlwnd wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 10:27:In everyone's (including mine) defense, the story started out as political. There isn't a non-political reason for Biden to speak out on this. So -- *meh* whatca' ya' gonna do?
Well, since this thread has gone totally political, I may as well add my two cents.
Avus wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 08:54:
Andrew Yang is Dem's only hope but too bad the general public see him as nothing.
RedEye9 wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 07:15:It seems as if at least a couple of posters read less than half the words of the excerpt and immedately assumed that Biden called all gamers "creeps, righteous and arrogant".jdreyer wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 06:28:No one here has bothered to click the link, much less read it typical
You guys are focusing on the wrong things. He's not really speaking directly against video games, but against all the arrogant tech-bros that all of you rail against constantly: Zuck, Cook, Nadella, Kotick, Riccitello, all those douchebags. The Leahy thing is actually countering Trump's claim that games cause mass shooting.
jdreyer wrote on Jan 18, 2020, 06:28:No one here has bothered to click the link, much less read it. typical
You guys are focusing on the wrong things. He's not really speaking directly against video games, but against all the arrogant tech-bros that all of you rail against constantly: Zuck, Cook, Nadella, Kotick, Riccitello, all those douchebags. The Leahy thing is actually countering Trump's claim that games cause mass shooting.