They try to use mental gymnastics to state these private companies aren't actually private companies, because they are retarded.Sooo all these guys who shout "commie" at everything that moves want to control corporations and their core businesses now.
Is that the gist of it?
This is an interesting situation because the guy who is supposed to run Twitter doesn't believe in censorship. He's stated it many times that the decision is often taken away from him. So although it's a privately held company, it definitely is being influenced in ways that run counter to the "private business can operate as it sees fit". Jack himself believes that twitter should be run like a public utility.They try to use mental gymnastics to state these private companies aren't actually private companies, because they are retarded.
There are many hosting companies around the world that would be more than happy to host whatever content people want.This is an interesting situation because the guy who is supposed to run Twitter doesn't believe in censorship. He's stated it many times that the decision is often taken away from him. So although it's a privately held company, it definitely is being influenced in ways that run counter to the "private business can operate as it sees fit". Jack himself believes that twitter should be run like a public utility.
Now when it comes to some of the hosting platforms I'm not quite sure how they're regulated, I'm guessing they aren't, but that should probably be concerning to people because we've moved well beyond the scope of what can be reasonably treated as "Well, they can run their business how they want." Most industries once they reach a certain size receive some form of regulation. I'm about as pro-"it's their business they can do what they want" as anybody, but this isn't someone saying "We won't bake you a cake, get the guy across the street to bake you one." This is someone saying "We won't bake you a cake, and we're going to have the landlord close the other bakery and if you want open your own bakery we'll make sure you can't hire a construction company."
The same people who want a smaller govt with less control over private citizens lives want the govt to control social media companies and have a say in private companies terms of services.Sooo all these guys who shout "commie" at everything that moves want to control corporations and their core businesses now.
Is that the gist of it?
Basically it seems so.The same people who want a smaller govt with less control over private citizens lives want the govt to control social media companies and have a say in private companies terms of services.
It's forced me to put away my ham radio and stop decoding morse code. It's a sad day. Dang millennials are ruining everything.I also find these inclusions of big tech in every huge conspiracy now quite fascinating.
Couple years ago they weren't even a thing, now they are the big heads of world conspiracy.
How does that make the old school conspirators feel?
There's a couple issues here. The first is that telecommunications in the U.S., as far as I'm aware, are regulated by the federal government. That's why the KKK can still have phones. In turn for them being allowed to access it, the phone company is absolved from the responsibility of things they do on the phone. What an internet provider is doing by saying "We can't let this person have a website because they're dangerous." means they also have to give up the protection of the things that happen as a result of their service. This is why Jack Dorsey is opposed to banning and censoring of people on twitter outside of people breaking laws or doxxing. He don't want that smoke. The second more existential problems is that, when you give anyone who wants permission to not host the ability to do so, the logical conclusion is that the party in question will obviously reach a point where no one will host them.There are many hosting companies around the world that would be more than happy to host whatever content people want.
This argument is flawed, the ISP's aren't doing anything, it's the hosting companies dropping them, and it's Apple saying we don't want you in our app store, something they regularly do to other apps.There's a couple issues here. The first is that telecommunications in the U.S., as far as I'm aware, are regulated by the federal government. That's why the KKK can still have phones. In turn for them being allowed to access it, the phone company is absolved from the responsibility of things they do on the phone. What an internet provider is doing by saying "We can't let this person have a website because they're dangerous." means they also have to give up the protection of the things that happen as a result of their service. This is why Jack Dorsey is opposed to banning and censoring of people on twitter outside of people breaking laws or doxxing. He don't want that smoke. The second more existential problems is that, when you give anyone who wants permission to not host the ability to do so, the logical conclusion is that the party in question will obviously reach a point where no one will host them.
In the case of Parler, you have a group of people who were told "It's a free country, twitter is a business. If you don't like it start your own twitter." So they did, but people didn't actually mean "Start your own twitter." They meant "We don't want you do exist anymore, and kicking you off twitter is probably good enough." So when they went and started their own twitter they kicked them off this hosting company and said "They're a business, you can start your own hosting company." but at this point it should be clear that this is an ever shifting set of goal posts that those in question will never be able to satisfy and the net being cast is catching increasingly more fish. You should be suspicious that a lot of the most vocal supporters of what went down last night are the same ones who pine for overreach and day to day government micromanaging.
You been following the trapping situation at all lately?
The argument is flawed if you don't follow it to it's logical conclusion. If whoever the fuck started their own hosting company, then the ISP's would start kicking them off for one reason or another. Apple may or may not regularly drop apps. They don't often nuke them due to political pressure and do it with 0 notice. Take it from someone who sees his freedoms whittled away on an almost yearly basis, this isn't a direction you want to be heading.This argument is flawed, the ISP's aren't doing anything, it's the hosting companies dropping them, and it's Apple saying we don't want you in our app store, something they regularly do to other apps.
We don't know how it would play out because it hasn't happened yet. There are plenty of hosting companies who would be more than happy to host them.The argument is flawed if you don't follow it to it's logical conclusion. If whoever the fuck started their own hosting company, then the ISP's would start kicking them off for one reason or another. Apple may or may not regularly drop apps. They don't often nuke them due to political pressure and do it with 0 notice. Take it from someone who sees his freedoms whittled away on an almost yearly basis, this isn't a direction you want to be heading.
2 years ago it was "If you don't like it start your own twitter where no one will bother you." How has that panned out? Are you really going to pretend you don't know how it will play out?We don't know how it would play out because it hasn't happened yet. There are plenty of hosting companies who would be more than happy to host them.
Why do you want private companies to be forced to do business with people they don't want to?2 years ago it was "If you don't like it start your own twitter where no one will bother you." How has that panned out? Are you really going to pretend you don't know how it will play out?
I don't think I said that I did. I'm telling you this is going in a direction that seems like it's not a big deal right now, but will be when you realize where you've gone. I don't have a good solution for you, but I see the problem coming from a mile away.Why do you want private companies to be forced to do business with people they don't want to?
I'm of the opinion a private business can do business with whomever they please. It's a fairly simple concept imo.I don't think I said that I did. I'm telling you this is going in a direction that seems like it's not a big deal right now, but will be when you realize where you've gone. I don't have a good solution for you, but I see the problem coming from a mile away.
All business is regulated to some degree by the government. That's the problem with applying that logic to more abstract businesses like hosting companies.I'm of the opinion a private business can do business with whomever they please. It's a fairly simple concept imo.
They are, I don't want more regulation, I want less.All business is regulated to some degree by the government. That's the problem with applying that logic to more abstract businesses like hosting companies.
That's not how it works. Up here it's getting increasingly difficult to run a gun shop because of the same type of stuff that happened with individuals yesterday. There eventually comes a bottle neck at the top, and that bottleneck has no interest in individual freedoms.They are, I don't want more regulation, I want less.
So, was Trump planning them, or were crazy people planning them and saying they were for Trump? Because those are 2 wildly different things.
That’s a weird thing to add to the justification for banning Trump on Twitter. I’m glad they banned the asshole, and I see no problem with it from a constitutional standpoint (I’m a constitutional scholar), so fuck that orange piece of shit scum, but saying others planned something on Twitter and off Twitter as part of the reason for banning Trump is specious.
This all leads to war on "domestic terrorism"That’s a weird thing to add to the justification for banning Trump on Twitter. I’m glad they banned the asshole, and I see no problem with it from a constitutional standpoint (I’m a constitutional scholar), so fuck that orange piece of shit scum, but saying others planned something on Twitter and off Twitter as part of the reason for banning Trump is specious.