• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      22 minutes ago

      France has a tech sector?

      Aesthetically I like reading technical texts in French.

      (Contrary to the stereotype, romantic texts not so much, that’s where English is better ; and despite trying my best, I still haven’t found a way to like Dutch ; neutral on German.)

      But the point is - has anything big lifted off in France in the last 20 years or so?

      I’m not talking about quite a few particular people whose names should be in history books. I’m talking about companies and systems.

      • thbb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 minutes ago

        There is a french tech sector: Doctolib, BlaBlaCar, and a few other original ideas have opened new types of services and taken their hold over Europe. Yet, those services cannot be adapted to individualistic north America.

  • Geobloke@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    3 hours ago

    I hate community notes, it’s a cost free way of fact checking with no accountability.

    I also hate these big international tech companies. Forget too big to fail, these are too big to change. We are all techno peasants and they are our tech lords

    • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      35 minutes ago

      i think you wanted to write: fuck america. fuck off americans.

      thats much shorter and in the realm of language the imbeciles might be able to understand.

      “death to america” should also work.

    • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I hate community notes, it’s a cost free way of fact checking with no accountability.

      I don’t think it’s necessarily bad, but it can be harmful if done on a platform that has a significant skew in its political leanings, because it can then lead to the assumption that posts must be true because they were “fact checked” even if the fact check was actually just one of the 9:1 ratio of users that already believes that one thing.

      However, on platforms that have more general, less biased overall userbases, such as YouTube, a community notes system can be helpful, because it directly changes the platform incentives and design.

      I like to come at this from the understanding that the way a platform is designed influences how it is used and perceived by users. When you add a like button but not a dislike button, you only incentivize positive fleeting interactions with posts, while relegating stronger negative opinions to the comments, for instance. (see: Twitter)

      If a platform integrates community notes, that not only elevates content that had any effort at all made to fact check it (as opposed to none at all) but it also means that, to get a community note, somebody must at least attempt to verify the truth. And if someone does that, then statistically speaking, there’s at least a slightly higher likelihood that the truth is made apparent in that community note than if none existed to incentivize someone to fact check in the first place.

      Again, this doesn’t work in all scenarios, nor is it always a good decision to add depending on a platform’s current design and general demographic political leanings, but I do think it can be valuable in some cases. (This also heavily depends on who is allowed access to create the community notes, of course)

      • Geobloke@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        54 minutes ago

        I get what you’re trying to say, they can incentivise accuracy and they do at least prompt people to be more accurate lest the community holds them to account. But what i don’t like is that there is no standard that the notes are held to and there is no accountability if either the original post or the community note are wrong.

        I also don’t like that the social media publishers are pushing the fact checkers onto the community to be done for free, but at the end of the day they own the community note and can delete it if they don’t like it. We are doing their work for them and taking accountability away from them

        • Geobloke@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          50 minutes ago

          Sorry if you replied to this already, but I wanted to add that what I meant to say is that they hide behind the accountability we give them

      • Geobloke@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        Lawsuits. As it stands the US supreme court is had said that social media companies can not be held liable for the things their users publish. Fact checking companies can be sued, news companies can be sued (see fox news and the voting machines lawsuit), Facebook can’t be held responsible in the same way

  • PeroBasta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I wonder how it will work and how can be enforced. Weekly I can easily find non fact checked article on “respectable” newspaper.

    If its the newspaper themselves that prioritize click baiting over fact checking, I don’t know how can we ask Google or meta to fact check their userbase

  • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    God I hope this happens, it will be absolutely hilarious when the gcp services on which the EU infraestructure for telecommunications, research and development, industry, transportation, banking, agriculture, logistics and health is built up, crashes burning to the ground.

  • HaiZhung@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 hours ago

    I get the sentiment, who doesn’t want to dunk on Google?

    But the headline is needlessly inflammatory. There is no law yet; and google essentially is saying please please don’t implement it, it totally doesn’t make sense.

    Don’t get me wrong, the EU should still implement it. And once it is law; Google will also comply.

  • MaxPow3r11@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Damn.

    Wish the rest of us could just ignore all laws & not face any consequences.

    What a fucking joke this entire system is.

    • OhVenus_Baby@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      They don’t have a problem giving someone 100 years for a quarter bag of weed though. For a first time offense.

      • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Oh that was long ago. it’s for not having a baby if you’re female now. Megacorps run usa and now the worst (which is best for some reason) ceo in the history of man will again be president and continue the clear path to government dismantling

  • timestatic@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    Fine the heck out of them then. If they don’t pay the fine ban em. Plenty of alternatives out there. More competition in the search engine market would be better anyways.

    Not too big of a fan of banning companies as the hurdles should be decently high… Especially if many people rely on their service but if they won’t comply with our jurisdiction long term I see this as the only option as fees can not be order of business to pay

  • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    12 hours ago

    Didn’t a year ago or so, Some European lawmaker made a vague hint in support of something that involved regulations on social media, and Elon replied “go fuck yourself” verbatem?

    Play hardball, or surrender and give them what they want. there’s no compromise or middle ground with these techbro fascists

  • xenomor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Given that we are going full authoritarian fascist now, perhaps the EU should ban Google, given the US tik tok precedent.

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      What a twist. In the 90s, the internet forced countries to wake up to the new modern era. It was a combination of American companies wanting both to expand and provide goodwill.

      And now, this new era is going to tell American companies to fuck off.

      • Toribor@corndog.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Democracies around the world rightly shouldn’t tolerate the blatant corruption and manipulative business practice of American tech companies.

        • ne0n@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          America itself seems fine with it.

          Oh wait, you said Democracies right. My bad.

  • DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    This is definitely to avoid the ire of fuhrer trump. It’s also coincidence that meta is abandoning fact checking right before the new administration

    He will sic the dogs of regulation on them if they don’t dance to his tune

  • DukeHawthorne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I want to live in a world where the EU bans Google, but we all know the EU will just roll over and accept this.