|
|
|
|
|
|
by ancap
3218 days ago
|
|
|
> I find this primacy extremely contradictory given that there can never be a level playing field and libertarians keep arguing against levelling the playing field where that would be possible to some degree (inheritance tax) > I also question whether private property is sufficiently well defined or definable without taking into account other considerations of what it means to be human. I'm sure we could have a very interesting discussion on these objections but I'd hate to go completely off topic. But I'll easily bite :) > I don't know what outlandish demands you are talking about. In the context of the thread, clearly the outlandish demand would be regulating the advertising that B uses in providing A a service. |
|
|
OK :-)
>In the context of the thread, clearly the outlandish demand would be regulating the advertising that B uses in providing A a service.
I don't want to regulate against annoying ads either. That's not what I'm talking about at all because this is something consumers can see with their own eyes, install an ad-blocker or stop using the service where there are alternatives.
But some of the things that ad networks are doing behind the scenes are so unexpected, complex or even malicious that consumers cannot be expected to understand them or to have voluntarily agreed to them. That's an area where I think something should be done.
We already have a lot of rules on the legality of contracts, on transparency, on duty of care, on liability for damage, etc. Not all of these rules have caught up to digital services yet.