0
4

[–] Dalai_Llama 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Posting that screenshot on imgur ought to show 'em real good!

0
2

[–] thebearfromstartrack 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

probably the only thing you'll accomplish is them moving off shore. Besides who PAYS the money to the COMPANIES that give it to big tech? YOU DO.

0
0

[–] NACHTJAGD ago 

It's very simple. Anyone who types in google.com or your variation of domain extension, the ISPs in your country are require to redirect such a request by a internet user to a local search engine. 75% of internet users won't even tell the difference. Watch how their entire monopoly comes crumbling down.

0
0

[–] thebearfromstartrack ago 

Agreed it IS a viable solution. Diverse and INDEPENDANT control, but not only that, certain FEDERAL policies would ALSO be adhered to (freedom of speech, NO spying, etc).

0
0

[–] Ghetto_Shitlord ago 

Under what law would you do this?

0
2

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The image cites their revenue, not profits. Big tech juggernauts tend to have very tight profit margins, if they're profitable at all. So even fining them a small portion of their revenue can hurt.

That said, the real way to hurt them isn't money at all, it's users. If everyone on voat convinced 10 people to ditch google twitter and facebook, they'd notice.

0
2

[–] aCuriousYahnz 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Neither will jail or monetary fines.

0
0

[–] LordSporkington ago 

Punitive Damages... Here's hoping

0
0

[–] YouveSeenTheButcher ago 

It's not about stoping them... It's about profiting off of them.