Technology. Were you able to bring that to the senate . Such as data privacy and things like that. Guest indeed. I have about those issues with me. You know, peter, we last visited when i was finishing work on the [inaudible] act which was the reauthorization of the fcc which is not been done since 1990 and then of course the mobile bill and the precision agriculture bill and some of those components that really are foundational items and in our internet ecosystem so getting those provisions finished was important and then bringing that knowledge and expertise to the senate where we are dealing with the privacy and Data Security of data issues not only commerce but Judiciary Committee. One thing i have found so interesting about being in the senate is how you take one issue and work across platform on it. Im also on Armed Services committee and the Veterans Committee and at veterans we are working to get everybodys records in the cloud. We are doing the same thing at Armed Services so
More than 20 years, since the birth of the internet age as we know i, section 230 has provided websites we put the immunity from liability from other users post. The Electronic Frontier foundation describes important sectionos of 230 this way. This legal and policy framework has offered youtube users to upload their own videos, amazon yelps offered countless offer reviews, craigslist lads, and facebook and twitter offer social networking to billions of internet users. Given the sheer size of user generated websites, it would be impossible and feasible for online people to have objectionable content popping up on their price. In short, section 230, a lot to protect the kind of innovations that is allowed the internet to drive since 1996. And yet, over the past few years section 230 has faced heighten criticism for both the left and right. They encouraged from the left argued that social media giants enjoy special protection. They know consequences. And other critics on the right have ar
Be as bad as it gets. That shouldnt change the overall picture that the rate of decline has dramatically accelerated for Traditional Television and it doesnt seem to be any question that were in a new normal with the rate of decline for the traditional system is probably 5 or so per year which is an extraordinarily rapid decline for something thats been around as long as traditional paytv distribution trend what youre talking about cable and satellite primarily, correct . Guest thats right. Traditional distribution the cable and satellite. Whats really interesting and maybe the most interesting part of the story is, if you went back a year ago you wouldve said that the virtual mvpd, so the you tube tv and hulu live and that sort of thing were really what was driving this migration away from traditional linear tv. Today it looks like that thesis was probably wrong and the uptake of those Virtual Services is not terribly strong actually and that what youre seeing is people just defecting
To accelerate. Interestingly we published a couple of weeks back a note that said we might see the acceleration in the short term and this might be as bad as it gets but that should not change the overall picture that the rate of decline has dramatically tolerated for Traditional Television and there does not seem to be any question that we are in a new normal for the rate of decline for the traditional system is 5 or so a year which is extraordinarily rapid decline for something thats been around as long as traditional att division. Host youre talking cable and satellite primarily, correct . Guest correct. Traditional distribution via cable or satellite. What is interesting and most interesting part of the story is if you went back a year ago you would have said the virtual and bpd so the youtube tv and the who live in that sort of thing were really what was driving this migration away from traditional linear tv. Today it looks like that thesis was wrong and the uptake of those Virtua
Property law they passed in july. A very basic deal. Does not move the ball forward, but relieves some of the tension and maybe takes the threat of retaliation down a notch. This administration has been riven by divisions over trade policy between the hawks and the pragmatist. This may be one side the pragmatist try to get their case before donald trump. The story says he has not made a decision yet. David we have five people who should have knowledge of the subject. At the same time, there was a contradiction. We have seen this in this administration before. They do not always move as one. Michael you do not know who each person talk to so you do not know which side of the debate they are on. There is only one decider, and that is donald trump. He seems to go back and forth depending on what his gut tells him. This is certainly a possibility. What we are reporting is it is on the table, not that it necessarily happen. David s got perhaps informed by the polls, particularly in the midw