IT Rule Roulette

I, V, M. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah.

This is simplified, which is also, like, the fast food equivalent to podcasts. Yeah. It should be an occasional intelligence and we hope it's not your main meal. So make up about, well, I feel that analogy could have- Yes, if you're told us about this- Like, before the recording, there was a lot more people who don't get one, dude.

Yeah, that analogy. We could have battered it. Oh, actually one thing that you won't get unlike what'll happen if you need fast food is that you won't become intellectually overweight if you listen to the simplification. Yeah, and it might be all the simplifying that you can, and you'll still be nice and intellectually intellectual like to it.

This would be like a sign of, would you like to add a sign of speak it to this? Take it as a meeting. Having just woken up literally less than 10 minutes ago. You know you're a muckoo but yeah, I think the idea of fast food early in the morning, I'm still just thinking about maybe some empty or something.

Empty or doesn't like the meat. Is it marlita? Wow. Okay.

Well, he knows the full form also. Don't miss it. Don't miss with advertising. What is the most ridiculous breakfast to have?

Like what is the most ridiculous breakfast to have? I have all kinds of garbage but I will tell you. Somebody else's proper food is not country. It doesn't concentrate.

So the first time I came to Bombay was for a scrambled tournament. Yeah. Two days. And obviously like I had no clue of what, you know, non-maloo food was.

Although like I spent the while in engineering college. So the safe thing to eat obviously is like, you know, idly whatever whatever. But I only like the whatever basically. So this was I think at Kalyan Junctioners meeting from a train back to Kerala.

So I said, can you have a plate of water? So it's like you won't eat a water. Like yeah, only the water. So he gave me a plate of water which was like what goes inside the water.

And I was too nervous to, you know, sort of. Yeah, the key to water power. This makes sense. Yeah, without the cuts.

Yeah. For me, I was in the field. It was actually a proper place for somebody else but I'm going to break my own room over here. You know, just speaking of back because the game is very heavy on rice.

So we gave us rice and a little pin of one of the package meat or something. And that was a weird combination to have early in the morning, but pay it worked. I'm the weirdest thing I've had. It's in a large industrial establishment where we have proper canteen workers, canteen and all that.

I'm a little more lazy. I'm even bigger than one. And I'm there because I just like passed my engineering. So I'm doing some kind of training there.

And it's literally first day on the job, I think. And I'm hanging around these guys and somebody says, would you like to have biscuits and some of the interesting slides? I said, okay. And what the same biscuits I do, which was it's a saucer with four glucose biscuits for Paleji.

We've got here on those glucose biscuits. And other four biscuits on top. And the whole thing dumped in chai one entire glass of pie. And then you eat that whole saugymus.

That's a little whole. It's like, okay, I mean, I'm not going to have engineering college, I suppose. Yes. Yeah.

I mean, I had eaten anything. I mean, I had eaten a money pile when I was there. It was out of the capacity of an industry. We should have got no cardboard cartons in the money pile because most of the people that I was already served in the messes.

One time it's not back. It's coming. No one sees where they're supposed to. I don't know how we were going to say green to the topic.

But that's it. It's three kids. I think it was, I think I was like, I'm only inviting a rotor to the court and some and the ball. And some of that one of the very, very remote called how about kind of place.

And of course, I mean, they had normal breakfast. I was at Poha and stuff like that on the menu, but I'm partially like that. I asked for a menu. The guy was really perplexed when he got me something cool.

There was everything like a menu and he had like, for some reason, the menu was quite like, I mean, it looked, it attempted to make it like a normal menu of some sort, and they had like a sandwich on it and all that. So I asked for a vegetable sandwich and, well, I got like some approximation of vegetable. Which is not the worst thing. But to top it off, I was like, how far off sugar, also I will get into my stuff, butterscotch, ice cream at the end of it for breakfast.

And at the end, I got, and I think it was very, very You feel like a Mr. Trico, like if they took the effort of adding little cubes of butter, they feel like they should definitely have a lot of the scotch as well. But it is okay, we will give these dabbas some leave it. They knew the highway was coming to mind about the shop.

Thanks for the question Tony, because usually when the food rate questions slowly, I feel hungry, but now I feel like repented. I think it's a good thing to say. I think that's a good thing to say. I think that's a good thing to say.

I think that's a good thing to say. I think that's a good thing to say. Thanks for that question, Tony. Because usually when the food rate questions slowly, I feel hungry, but now I feel like repented enough to continue intermittent fasting till dinner time.

So thank you for listening. I will call you every morning and let me make sure I stick to my diet. I'll be talking. Okay, yeah.

So before we get into our zingers for the day, I will be sure. I see what you did there. We really have to acknowledge that the secret ingredient of our KFC recipe is the secret life of sake, not actually. Yes, actually, whatever.

Fans, I think it's fair to call them. Yeah, I do really take this effort then. Yeah. At at number doll do you MB or do when they hadn't created the secret life for CK dot it so check that out.

Except you have to misspell CK its name which is not very hard to do. I k e t dot it. Yeah. And then he's left is for CK actually have a secret life.

Yeah. That's all. That's all. That's the you know you don't even know he has it.

That's our secret. Yeah. So that's so that's filling a secret like one so really can put on his missing one. I think I just might as well migrate the URL to public life of CK dot it.

That's it. So whoever who I was listening to has idea and what do we do on the public life of CK dot and please do not misspell public especially by missing a weekend. Wonderful. Please don't.

Can you give one? Okay. So it's a good thing that we're talking about defamatory content and all because today we are discussing the IT rules of 2021 which have been in the news as opposed to the IT rule number one which is have you applied turning it off? I thought you were going to say something like a random IT rule that your IT department will have for your office laptops.

Have you guys faced any issues like that since you guys are working remotely for Tony and Shrieket since you're working remotely for all your companies. I mean I had major issue last year where one of my screen literally was on the blink right it was randomly blinking every couple of minutes. I was going to be really difficult to work and the IT guys trying to diagnose a remotely eventually he raises a ticket and raises all this this day and they come the replace my display the replace the motherboard all of that they replace and once they're replacing it so they're still blinking. I'm like what the hell and then I realized the problem was you know when you disconnect your charger to screen please the charger was not connecting properly.

So they finished releasing everything and then realized that the charger problem not even the battery problem is a charger connection problem and then eventually they finally changed the charger as well. So they effectively replace the entire laptop because they couldn't diagnose the problem. Wonderful. Sorry I mean Antony Blinkkin.

Oh my god. Good coffee. Good coffee. I'm going to call the blue screen of death because we've gone on for 12 minutes without getting into the garbage.

That's why you should listen to Pink Floyd Motony like they have some songs in which like the vocals start like in about eight minutes and what's the one silent song as well like four minute thirty three second. Oh that's John Keigh's four thirty three which is a fascinating command. I'd love to know what you take about the most because I know he's an interview. No that's the only song I can recreate.

No no no no no. The thing is to recreate it properly you need to have your instruments with you so you can't just sit in silence for four minutes thirty seconds. So the idea is like a full orchestra has to perform it by sitting over there in the instrument. So the idea for that song is all the uncomfortable silence from both the performers and the audience that's supposed to make it up.

It's quite an interesting thought actually and there is an album of ours. Yes. This is what I think is good to be. No no no.

Okay so today's episode is about the truth. It's true. Yeah so getting back to the idea rules. So I think we've had multiple discussions even earlier about how the internet is the largest human experiment and it is a flawed one and that and there needs to be some way to allow free speech while also making it suitable for public consumption with very much the L in it.

So we've discussed previously about Facebook's attempt at a Supreme Court and things like that and how damn difficult it is to do because you know how do you get consensus on what is allowed and what is not and to make all our lives easier the idea rules 20-30 wouldn't have come in so it basically means that everything that you will tell you what to do so you have to. But there's an interesting sort of and to be fair it is required that you know there is a framework in which you know speech and content online is regulated in a manner. I wouldn't say I mean I'm not sure of regulated as a right term but you know made fit for normal consumption right and what there's an interesting piece of news recently in the newly elected Kerala government one of the ministers actually said that you know there are so many of these serials which promote superstitions, unscientific stuff and misogyny therefore we are considering you know censorship of serials right so my first reaction was hey great I mean this is the need of the art because like everyone watches these damn serials from you know seven to ten PM and it's not really helping you know society in that direction but I think by and large we should all agree that censorship of any form is not ideal right I mean what do you guys think? Well like there were so many various other incidents that I was thinking of and all these are things that we know like a media office shared when Trump was taken off Twitter for instance but in retrospect is that a good thing or bad thing any free or many liberal properties who are our heroes they said that it was a bad thing in the long run including a lot of leaders in India that was an example or you take for example revisionism where those statues are now going to take a dump last year during the BLM protest so is that a good thing or a bad thing like to one reason yes you shouldn't celebrate these heroes but then people should be made aware so is it just enough to add that oh by the way this guy statues over here but he was jacked in his time the thing that was proposed on Netflix I think sometime I don't hide like this the story but be aware of what was done maybe is labeling then the way to go I really don't I don't know if there is like a clear-cut answer and another thing that happened interestingly enough last week or so was the Facebook Supreme Court or what are they called I think the oversight board ruling that Trump will stay off the platform but hey don't leave it to us to make this decision it should be a Facebook Facebook make sure our rules around these things and then we will judge this against that so I've heard a lot of analysis on this who was right who was wrong what is the right way to deal with this and many people whose opinions I agree with pretty much 100% of the time they're still caught between this okay is it right to be platform and all I think the same I mean what your question was really kind of comes from the same thing they really is no precedent to something like this and you know I'm reminded of one article I read a whiteback which was are humans even ready for the internet right now humans evolved and they're kind of wild to be in societies of 50 to 100 people max and as Satan strands all of us know basically what I'm talking about over here suddenly now everybody having all the knowledge in the world human brains haven't he offered to deal with that just yet so no answers I have no answers I have a number of five minutes but I don't have an answer so yes I am a yeah but I mean this is also I mean the classic the og of the censorship question in some ways in modern times is in 2016 the mine camps came out of copyright and for the first time in posture Germany they got the right to actually get published and there was I mean really it had the right and even now I mean but then there was a huge controversy and conversation around it and eventually they have published the mine camp but it comes with commentary so with sentences there's like a lot of commentary around it very very says something about the jews or says something about some statements and there's commentary under it saying he's lying he's just false like it's like a life act check in a book so it's a book with commentary that's the only version that's allowed to be released in Germany of the mine camp and then you can look at it from two perspectives I mean he's effectively widely pronounced at the most evil man in history and his book is one of the most racist books ever that's without doubt but then again it is censorship you're treating an entire country that you're not allowing them to read a text and make their own judgments on it but then again they also see something got prompted I mean at the end of the day Trump was given the benefit of free speech and two speech advocates would say everything that he said at the capital was free speech but then again what followed was I mean you cannot not say that that was not an incitement by Trump right and so yeah there is that the assumption of free speech is that oh everyone will take critical reasoning and apply it to every piece of speech they see and therefore free speech will be allowed but then again society doesn't function that way like there are people as Chuck you mentioned with the internet and with mass communication overall people react differently somebody act recently some react with reason and when different people react differently it does eventually come down where a certain level of criticality and certain level of social speech censorship needs to be implemented otherwise I mean who should say any kind of speech that can absolutely destroy the world in some way not be applied yeah the problem according to I mean as far as I can see you cannot empower anyone to censor anything to be a censor because those people that person is just as susceptible to the impulses that they can look public are so there is no absolutely no way of ensuring that the person who's in charge of censoring will do a good job so it's absolutely a bad idea to have any kind of censorship law at all it has to be a battle so now take the case of Trump so Trump was evidently you know manipulating public and he was he was like passing completely false you know narratives and people were swallowing it because that's what people do that's that's how social evolution has taken place and I really actually it's very instructive how how he did it so any of us can do it any party anyone can do it it's actually quite interesting just want to point that you were speaking about the Trump supporters saying one of the guys who was that that you were on shaman the guy where he was the capital who went there that guy's lawyer actually made an argument saying that the people who actually followed Trump are he literally said this or dumb and so like all of these people you can't allow unrestricted fees because they literally follow what this guy was metaphorically saying like the lawyer is actually making the argument in court right now so I mean in some ways how do you tend to combat that so this is a very difficult way I mean you know this is weaponized right so this is like like an exoskeleton I don't know if you know what an exoskeleton is so yeah yeah so if you take a 90 pound weekly and put him in a crowd of you know muscular guys the muscular guys are going to beat him up every time you know an exoskeleton you're going to take everyone's ass so now twitter is like a social exoskeleton for intellectual 90 pound weekly Wow can you say that again twitter is like an exoskeleton?

Yeah, an exoskeleton for 90 pound intellectual weekly right so they are all of a sudden amplified you know our friend uh gober actually who gets away with absolute rubbish okay uh just because he has one of a million followers so why should that be so if he's speaking rubbish it doesn't matter whether he's speaking whether he has one follower or a million he's still rubbish and yet the fact that he has a million followers whatever the follow-up I don't know it gives a lot of traction so this is what happens and now you have a reason being though you know now it's not down to a sex and you know what gets you what gets you followers so you peddle that kind of content and then I don't know how to do an example so you keep saying that and people will follow you there are people who who want it is like a safety cocoon you have this make believe world of you know a certain kind of you know certain kind of things happening and be at something a certain kind of people and everything and once there's a body of people who believe in all those things you feel comfortable in that because that's what gives you comfortable as well and then all of a sudden you guys are all amplified because all of you are like like 10 million of you so and Twitter allows you to be heard now the question is do you censor or do you make them accountable so censorship is probably a bad idea because there's just one bunch of people who want to slip this apart and if you get a couple of villains there and that's over so definitely you want to make them accountable now the problem is how do you make them accountable when everything is real time if I went out in Twitter it's not something really incendiary how is Twitter responsible they could of course delete my tweet after some time but they take some time to even process that whether a billion or a billion second yeah yeah so yeah I mean I don't think we're at that stage but the big challenge is right how do you delete something I mean there are objective things that need to be deployed from and then there are subjective things right so for instance Chai Parnography everyone will agree is an instant you know take the right but fake news for manipulated media right most recently with our friends from the IT cell when they release the booty or whatever and alt news debunk it is fake news and Twitter promptly tagged it as manipulated media who enforces Twitter date but then who counters the enforcement police actually goes to the Twitter office to you know look up employees right in my head it was really funny because all of them were working from home I think like I did yeah I think we went looking for the Twitter machine in Twitter what do you think it was an agency yeah so I'm guessing they went to beat up the Twitter machine or whatever but and that's the problem right here when we talk about enforcement everyone has a different set of worldviews and unless it's something as objective as child pornography we'll get into extreme race zones which is why this regulation you know we'll explain in detail but it won't have elegant solution at the end of it yeah I go to hell yeah and just to add to one thing I said I don't know if it's possible to have one blanket set of rules for everybody like shoot the standard for somebody with two nullins point one follower be different from those who have a million followers you can argue that when you have a billion followers you have some sort of responsibility because you have that sort of you have that kind of reach and although it's not I don't think there is a unique clear cut elegant solution at all given the current speed of things and the current state of AI ML or case maybe but one interesting solution that I've seen being possible I know what stage of development this is it is when some piece of news or one tweet or something gains incredible velocity it doesn't matter where it was based on validation somebody was a million followers or one follower across platform YouTube Twitter Instagram whatever it is then it will be looked into it's not really about is this traveling too quickly and once a velocity is there then the platforms will have an objective pair of human eyes or a subjective pair of human eyes on it and this is the other thing right this brings into place so many different questions section 230 content moderation and this challenges for platforms around the world and you've seen these platforms from Twitter to YouTube to Instagram and Tintly not LinkedIn strangely enough who are struggling with all sorts of content moderation where to draw the line and of course what is kosher in one country hence the literally kosher in one country might not pass muster in another country which has a completely different set of values and where transmission errors etc might happen so if you Facebook operates in Thailand for instance do they need Thai content moderators to understand what's and all that so this was the classic problem that happened in Myanmar for example I was looking this topic there was like this way Myanmar had it had all the rights and all that stuff and Facebook was actually something that fueled it and it's not genocide genocide I mean sorry but when that it was fueled by that the biggest problem that Facebook had was that one language moderators who understand what was being posted and be able to filter that so by the time the translation happened and they could realize that it was inside full of or any sort it was often like up there for 24-48 sometimes even longer us and those and that post they're eventually in fact even till date is struggling to kind of work on the translations for that and on that later not actually this is where it also comes down to where it comes down to a lot of these platforms what they're trying to do right now is filter on the basis of some kind of a great amount objective to right where they're like okay is this statement T-10 false or is this statement actually true right and that is one step I mean it does work to some extent where I mean to be honest where Trump to some extent where it worked and there was a lot of uh universal acclaim other than the a lot of the groups about Trump's banning was he was making a lot of patenty false statements and there eventually they said you know what if you continue making these patenty false statements we will stop your ability to make these statements so we're going to take away your platform to do that and that's when the deep platform did but then again I mean see this is where it comes down to I think Tony was saying this I think you mentioned it maybe on your Facebook or somewhere where you said this point about the truth covered by other countries so weird and different right then say you watch a news story that being covered by another country like say BBC whatever and they're talking about the ground reality either in India or in Kerala or something and you cringe when they when they take such a simplistic or generalized view of your nuanced context right and that's where truth actually gets kind of disaggregated in some way and so you don't know what exactly is that exact definition of truth whether oh this guy it's not as clear as this guy's right this guy's wrong as we can probably infer from that he's right by the same conflict right now which is just a model mess there are a lot of context where there is a real objective truth and an objective also there are a lot of context where it's all modeled up right in the middle and there is no clear way to draw like that yeah and yeah yeah you go no absolutely I mean I think all of this is a model messes up right here I think we should get to what is the rule though because I mean that's been very fairly clearly laid out and it is in effect as of our recording which is on 29th May so what had actually happened was there was an initial you know IT rule that was laid down in 2000 and then further you know added on in 2011 and obviously I mean it's time for revision now because since 2011 and 2021 several things have changed you know social media and otherwise right so actually this draft rule was proposed in 2018 and you know it's coming into effect now actually it's coming to it was notified in February this year and it's in effect now so it applies to several things including OTT platforms you know digital news channels and social media intermediaries right and the word intermediary is important right so what the term intermediary states is that a platform like let's say Facebook or Twitter nearly access a channel where anyone can publish their content without it being touched upon or edited right and Facebook or Twitter are just intermediaries and therefore not legally liable in this case right so this is a protection that is very important for them to operate because imagine the scenario where you know anything you or I say on Facebook or Twitter causes them to be directed code that would be unviable section 230 what this is what is called section 230 US oh okay really right she's the place used a metric scale of sections yeah so and in this regard in the new IT rules what the government has done is made a demarcation between social media intermediaries and significant social media intermediaries and significant social media intermediary is any platform that has over 50 lakh users so which practically means every you know Facebook Twitter WhatsApp event right so all of these channels now become significant social media intermediaries and fall within the purview of the law where they've laid down very sort of stringent conditions saying there needs to be a physical person who is an Indian citizen who resides in India who will be responsible for you know any of the content moderation requests or things that the government deems is not worthy of being on social media be taken down right and they have like only 36 hours to act in case a takedown request is put in and some 72 hours to respond and 15 days and stuff like that but the basic point is we saw that even without a person being in charge in Twitter you know the police just arbitrarily went there right and the moment you give a lot to you know the people enforcing it you are asking for trouble as we've seen several times over the lockdown where people have been beaten up for stepping out asked to do frog jumps there was a video from Bangalore where because there was you know randomized testing someone was basically you know man handled and beaten before they put the no swab into him right so it's not a great idea giving more power to the state in simple terms and especially if there is a person at risk so what happens if the social media intermediaries don't comply is that they lose this protection which was section 79 which said you're an intermediary so if you don't apply or if you don't put in a person in charge if you don't comply with these 20 21 regulations then basically any post on Facebook or Twitter can cause the government to drag the social media intermediary to quote and that's pretty massive I mean this is where I mean the fundamental challenge here is I mean if you I mean in the language that you read out as well for someone like the US where most of these intermediaries are physically dazed it would be or I mean they have their physical jurisdiction over these intermediaries so they can maybe extend their reach to those people but for I mean think of it this way where a very influential NRI is posting something on one of these channels about India and gaining a lot of traction in India this entire thing goes out for a toss because in the government is no jurisdiction whatsoever about content that's calling heavy influence in India because in their rule it's that they talk about an Indian citizen who's residing within India right I mean they literally cannot do anything and then they will have to start going outside the bounds of the law that they'll start harassing that person from whatever they link they have to India and whatever way and doing that with the government is known to have done previously at least in terms of it. There's another provision right which is you can simply withhold that content in India and I think there are several different laws right now. That's what they want basically yeah which is which is also now I mean it's the way the Indian government seeks to like control the media is still so primitive in terms of like treat media in some way where I mean one they are they are trying to control something which is I mean once they start trying to control it's like trying to fight means it goes all over the place and whatever way where people are just going to kind of figure out the way to get the country. The internet is on I mean you know any kind of free country where you don't have overarching like absolute controls over every fiber cable that's coming and going out of the country and filtering every piece of every kilobyte of data you're not going to be able to control that and even in so they're not worried about every kilobyte of data they're only worried about the high momentum stuff so till it's high momentum really no one cares so only when I become and then they want to have the power to take it out.

Now under the circumstances it is not as draconian as China there is a reasonable amount of time. They want to do is they want to be able to inflict retribution so this is where he sums because even autocrats I would argue that even autocrats need free information because you can't like someone like Putin cannot rule all of russian his own he needs his millions how does he know that his millions some really bad people are doing things that he won't do himself if no one's allowed to report it. Yeah I mean if the recent critic of his sample fee to the individual. And if he is not able to if he doesn't know if he has no way of knowing what's happening on the street and he can't go personally check then at some point of time okay the his popularity will be so low that it will sort of everything will collapse and if it does he will be killed this member in the street it's not like he can't sort of fade away he'll be found and killed and it is possible to survive like this not Korea has been doing this for like seven decades and they're going okay but everyone is not Korea so yeah and I mean I think to put a crude analogy to this right it's basically like the government has said now you appoint a hostage so anytime they want something to happen they put a gun to their head right exactly it was like a you know decentralized abstract entity now you put her chief compliance officer so his or her neck is always on the like right and that's why he's because again if all of this is subjective basically whoever is in power gets to dictate you know what the level of objective subject I'm gonna see that job description for a company compliance officer as a good lawyer you know and what'll end up happening is obviously the person taking up this job is likely to be sympathetic to the you know dominant ideology of the types and there will be enough people applying for this job so and they will in some senses be oversellers and take down things on their own with this thing saying okay otherwise it's minor-contilline you know we need to take this thing down so it's it's a bad spiral in a complicated situation right so but the other major thing which is very clearly worrisome is that other than the state-down thing the new rules state that there needs to be a provision to I didn't trace the first originator of any kind of problematic content and this is why so in the overall scheme of things Facebook and Google have said that they will comply as of yesterday or day before Twitter has actually put out a couple of tweets saying you know we want to respect the privacy of Indian citizens to which a moral lecture suitably followed from the authorities in India WhatsApp has actually taken the government to court because of this first originator thing because WhatsApp is end-to-end encrypted right and that protects privacy and likely discuss on that episode of PGK actually the only way to break the WhatsApp encryption is via brute force which is a police constable takes your phone by brute force and then screenshots everything right so and this is extremely important because the moment you put in a provision or a backdoor to break the encryption or you know trace the first originator everything related to privacy was for a toss right and there are significant problems with you know people bad actors being able to spoof this mechanism and you know then all hell breaks loose right and I think Chuck shout out to you one book recommendation you had was alchemy from where he said that as opposed to the physical world where you know the opposite of good ideas a bad idea in the real world the opposite of a good idea can be a good idea right and the same thing with free speech and privacy so the opposite of free speech I mean basically privacy and free speech go hand in hand right and it's it's very important that privacy is respecting so this first originator thing is actually like a majorly problematic piece of legislation yeah nothing more to add to that in case somebody legislates this part this part does yeah I shall be the first to be the first I'm much more to the present yeah and the whole point I mean the whole argument against this is oh you know why should you be worried if you have nothing to hide right and yeah that is that is brilliant in some sense it's like that small penis rule right small penis rule is basically if you want to write a book defaving someone you know you basically describe the character exactly as is and then also say that this character has an extremely small penis so the idea is that there was an interesting question won't come in so because then he's admitting that he has a small penis so he'll be taken more about yeah when did you stop eating your life yeah so so interesting yeah so that's the whole problem right I mean it's not about nothing to fear therefore nothing to hide basically there is a question of legality versus safe space and everyone is allowed to have a safe space it should be a fundamental basic right of human existence which is now being questioned because human existence is no longer physical right it's also virtual so what we discuss on our private WhatsApp group shouldn't be anyone's you know it shouldn't end up in anyone's hands right so yeah and also equally they have other problematic you know clauses right like doubling the period of data retention so yeah and all of this basically means that you can you know go back in time and sort of act on things which shouldn't be acted upon in all honesty but the grainess of the entire situation makes everything complicated yeah I was I was recently reading about one of the first ever social networks on the internet to wait before even awkward and stuff so I think it wasn't even a browser based platform it was something called the well I'm not sure if you've heard about the well stands for a little bit of yeah I was in the link it was one of those it's one of those wired long reads and how the community etc came up with and it's looking for the kind of conversations that they were having on that platform the topics that were discussed people being very open with their drug life so this is like long back in the way we were in the 80s and all that before drug loss so I am guessing even in the regular and I was like wow okay just that conversation to happen the internet that point of time is just a small community of people you need to really care about what you are talking about over there beyond offending a group of say 10 or 15 people who are part of that community or that particular thread and I was just thinking wow this is like almost such a long way where right now we'll be so careful about whatever we put up online not just because of government but what other people might think and whether we'll be called out by somebody else because something else or whether the culture and consciousness will shift so much that's something that is kosher today will be taken as an offense sometime later in the future and then your job process if you saw all these things you don't have to think about it and wow we'll come along again but remind me of the one piece I get other humans even ready or equipped for the for the internet so like maybe they think hey what would happen if actually they were just taken away how would be different would be would that be a positive or a negative because of discussion to have for another simplified episode yeah just just an addendum to your other point which was about the how the web one point was in some way was that there was this entire I mean the first iteration of the internet actually because of the most free talking not just because it was this close community but it was also because most online identities were entirely anonymous and non-linked right I mean if you remember the first one the internet nobody knows your adog right that was the web one point oh but like if you look at web two point way anyway it's all about not only does everyone know your adog but knows where you live and what your kara looks like so that's the fundamental difference right and that's around back to this particular topic because every one more interesting question okay so till now even today you have a reference point for news that is a theoretical content available on newspapers and news channels right so you assume that because someone is actually you know a responsible corporation is either printing it or broadcasting it that it is true or there is some proof in it or there is it is curated verified or whatever it is and this is now diminution so news channels itself even modest moderate channels news channels like the public are often guilty of something that might not be entirely true who do you believe so what happens the question is what happens when this vanishes entirely so what do people take as a reference point so it's everything is just a you know sort of un-differentiated blob of information how do you know what is true and what is not if you're going to be the same other than what the majority so this is what happens when you're on twitter if you see someone you know a tweet which has had 100,000 or 50,000 tweets would you assume that that is true as opposed to something that I said which had just one thing so what I'm saying is we are moving towards a world where everything is going to be sort of decided by by this so isn't it sort of logical that you know one of these guys are not doing they're not right but that it has to be regulated or people have to be held accountable at some point I'm just thinking about because instantly my gut feelers that nothing should be no one in power should have the power to censor because that's at the same time there is is just now like I mean your voices can round out one voice far more effectively than a common cat so yeah no but I mean the question is who enforces right like does the flat out do you allow it has to be the problem you know if you know if you know but Marx not to power even though he's a good man and be like he will be in the global price for peace soon he may not be you know even all this before I think and I like that and as that return in lines as who will watch the watch me right exactly yeah so nothing slight counterpoint there is that if you look at it the government or the party in power their incentive is to come back to power again in five years right so you're already compromised in terms of there has to be an inherent bias in terms of what's going on in the team feeling down or not as opposed to a Facebook where it's like it doesn't matter it shouldn't matter which side it's coming from because that's not their incentive so yeah I mean I don't know I mean I don't know would you rather have you rather have a corporation or political party yeah it's a very difficult question it's like you know do you want I don't know do you want Roman Polanski or Jeffrey this is not yeah so it's working and complicated and there are no clear answers basically what I'm getting away from this conversation yeah and we are talking about passwords yeah there was a simpler thing I remember when mass communication meant the sermon by the priest on Sunday so there are other aspects to this new rules as well it also wants to censor OTT content right and it doesn't want to really censor it but rather it indicated that it wanted to censor and basically what happened as a result was that I think there was a controversial series on Amazon Prime called Tanda was something which I didn't watch but I mean there was some scenes that had to be deleted and apologies rolled out and stuff like that so basically what happened as a result is one obviously all OTTs will now shy away from you know edgy content two they've moved towards self-regulation and 17 OTTs have actually released you know sort of self-regulation guidelines just so that the government doesn't interfere but as per the rules right there are actually three levels of you know review for OTT content one is self-regulation by applicable entity then self-regulation by a body of you know self-regulating body of applicable entities and then oversight mechanism by the central government which basically pretty much means censorship of OTT content as well right so again that's going to be problematic and the other part is about digital news media channels like which is why we check we shut down the third slip because now those also come under the purview of you know censorship or legal action so that's the broad strokes of what this new IT ruling is so I mean there's no way Facebook and Twitter are going to get banned in India if anyone's wondering but these are the in place and if they don't comply the government can take away its intermediary protection yeah so basically anything that is put up on the internet can be subject to this which means we think that if you're a content creator the best possible space to get into right now is instrumental rock music if you find certain court patterns offensive then I don't think then I think I'm a for our species yeah you can only commit minor offense system but interestingly enough to counter my own point you might remember that and she can let me know this that the catholic church had outlawed the so-called tri-tone because it gave this devil's note so it was not the devil's note and all that the base of the blues and heavy metal and all that so even instrumentals can be if you say oh this case anti-national or something that is going from major to minor you know playing C minor after A minor or something like that I wonder what point will be brought into court so I just created a beautiful conversation called yeah we should call all these guys DARPA wins himself and in bonus you guys created this mess yeah yeah yeah then of course eventually someone we go and dig up Gutenberg although he didn't actually do all that much I mean there was a south park episode where they actually turned off the internet and turned it on again and everything was fixed so the business situation that's so brilliant so my kids are complete devotees of south park and on the odd occasion I've seen it in the past I found a very complimentary offensive so I just stopped watching and then I saw a few episodes and then I realized how amazingly awesome it is so I have never seen a parent so proud of his place for watching south park I had to hide signature novels for my mom anyway circling back how Tony I'm not on that note here I don't know I don't know there's too much of a conclusion we don't know here every day is a new adventure yeah yeah no so pretty much I mean I don't think too much changes for the regular user etc it's just that you will see more of you know content and accounts being taken down and it is likely that it is going to be voices of dissent which is not a good thing we are dissenting further and further to the this media form of the media to sort this feels like an episode where we give people the vada without the but hey that's also a timeline I suppose for my cards before bugs yeah yeah so yeah I can't even join again and stay safe stay unregulated and stay simplified wow bye bye bye