August 24th, 2024

With Power Comes Great Responsibility Platforms Want to Be Utilities (2021)

Tech giants have created user dependency through opaque account termination processes and laws favoring corporate interests. Advocates seek transparency in moderation and "information fiduciary" rules to protect consumer rights.

Read original articleLink Icon
With Power Comes Great Responsibility Platforms Want to Be Utilities (2021)

Tech giants have increasingly positioned themselves as indispensable utilities in our digital lives, claiming missions that emphasize connectivity and accessibility. However, their practices often lead to significant user dependency, with individuals entrusting sensitive data to these platforms. When users face account suspensions or terminations, the processes are frequently opaque and frustrating, lacking clear appeals or explanations. This situation is exacerbated by laws like the DMCA and CFAA, which have historically favored corporate interests over consumer rights, allowing companies to maintain control over user data and access. The consolidation of power among a few tech giants has created a landscape where losing access to one service can result in the loss of multiple essential services, from personal data to financial transactions. Critics argue for the need for transparency in moderation decisions and the establishment of "information fiduciary" rules that would require companies to act in the best interests of their users. Such reforms could ensure that users retain control over their data and have clear recourse in the event of account issues.

- Tech giants have become essential utilities, leading to user dependency on their platforms.

- Account termination processes are often opaque and lack adequate appeal mechanisms.

- Laws like the DMCA and CFAA have historically favored corporate interests, limiting consumer rights.

- Losing access to one service can result in the loss of multiple essential services.

- Advocates call for transparency in moderation and the establishment of "information fiduciary" rules.

Link Icon 2 comments
By @AlbertCory - 3 months
> But as bad as tech giants’ content removal and account termination policies are, they’re paragons of sense and transparency when compared to their appeals processes. Many who try to appeal a tech company’s judgment quickly find themselves mired in a Kafkaesque maze of automated emails (to which you often can’t reply), requests for documents that either don’t exist or have already been furnished on multiple occasions, and high-handed, terse “final judgments” with no explanations or appeal.

This.

There are lots of laws and court rulings about customer privacy, indecent content, and right-to-repair. I haven't heard about any commission or legislature working on a "customer bill of rights" but maybe there is one? If not, there should be.

A clear and fair appeal process for any company exceeding a certain size, with spelled-out procedures, complete with names and phone numbers of the responsible people, seems like a reasonable thing to mandate. As a rule the market should be given a chance to work, but it seems pretty clear that it's failed here. That thread this week about Chase Bank is the poster child.

"You have violated our policies" without any details on what policies you violated, or how, should someday be just a horrible memory of the bad old days.

By @kkfx - 3 months
Another step toward corporatocracy... But still most have not realized we head to a feudal world of FAILED big companies living just on a plethora of slaves...