Nevada bill would allow tech companies to create governments

[Fugus]

https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2021/...ms-to-be-a-go/

Got one already trying to repeat the mistakes, excuses and exploitation of the past.

[Rasulis]

https://m.lasvegassun.com/news/2021/...ms-to-be-a-go/

Got one already trying to repeat the mistakes, excuses and exploitation of the past.

Don't hold your breath. Blockchain does not have the resources to build and run a company owned tech city. First, building a city with proper infrastructure cost a lot of money. Second, no matter how you look at it, running a city is a money losing proposition. Third, they idea that tech workers would want to live in the middle of the Nevada desert is silly.

[Shadowferal]

Another losing proposition...libertarians never want to learn.

[Rasulis]

Seriously, if they are going this route, I hope the State of Nevada will vet the company and the plan thoroughly. BlockChain is a bit player (pun intended) in the asset management sector with just over 300 million in managed asset. I don't think we need another ghost town in the middle of the Nevada desert.

[Bodakane]

I'm just gonna love all the court cases about delegated governmental responsibility to private corporate entities.

A few may recall that companies built and owned town in the factory-town dynamic in the post-war period. Consider Marsh v. Alabama, a pretty narrow case about whether religious solicitors (knock on doorbells, talk about Jesus and your church) could be prevented from going door to door because it wasn't really public property. Just imagine some silicon valley company trying to restrict what they don't like about their towns in California and trying to regulate it, and then someone sues that their regulations on vagrancy, religious soliciation, posting of objectionable political signs. I'm looking forward to hilarity.

Doesn't;t that mean everything is working as intended, though?

Aren't we set up to have as much freedom as the courts decide by interpreting law?

[Biglog]

Only responding to this since it's 25 pages long, which means a whole lot of people don't understand how these things work. First, a lot of clickbait type articles will splash a shocking headline like "Bill introduced in Montana to declare possums US citizens", and people get outraged. The issue is states have LOTS of state representatives, and it's very easy for any of them to introduce a bill on literally anything. It doesn't mean it will ever pass. It doesn't mean it will ever become law, even just in that state. But it makes for an easy article to write with a ready-made clickbait title.

Second, the article is referring really to "Smart Cities" which I hate to tell you but already have been a thing all over the world for like 30 years. It's essentially just a tax-incentivized zone to attract new business. If your city has an industrial park, odds are it is setup with something similar. It's not really at all companies "creating their own government" as described. That's highly and intentionally misleading. It's simply a way to attract new business (as the article even says if you actually read it), via tax incentives. Many many places do this as a way to entice corporations to move there to create jobs, with promises of tax-free zones and new infrastructure like power/water. The "Smart City" is just how it's done usually to work around state and local laws regarding taxes, not at all to create "their own government", which is ridiculous to even propose in this conspiracy theory type of way.

The article is a fine way though to try to fire up conservatives who are looking for any reason to complain about tech companies, which is clearly what the real aim of the article was. If you think to yourself, "Don't be upset at the people making insurrectionist or hatefully racist comments, for sure it's the tech companies in the wrong for "censoring" people that break TOS by making those statements repeatedly", you've taken a wrong turn. And bonus points for failing to understand that Freedom of Speech isn't absolute and does not include inciting violence. Just like Trump would use the phrase "serves at the pleasure of" whenever he'd fire someone, if you use a tech app you use it at the pleasure of the company. It's no different than walking into someone else's brick and mortar business. They can choose not to serve you, require you to wear shoes and a shirt, kick you out for misbehavior, etc. Your rights are not infinite nor do they extend everywhere you go.