51–60 of 243 posts
If some of y'all put the time you spent into defending white supremacists and hate platforms in the name of free speech or independent thought instead into achieving a more just, anti-racist society we'd all be so much better off.
If some of y'all put the time you spent into defending white supremacists and hate platforms in the name of free speech or independent thought instead into achieving a more just, anti-racist society we'd all be so much better off.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look, if you get a reputation for entering businesses and shitting on the floor, you'll find yourself banned from all of them eventually. The same is true for online businesses.
Money is speech, so says the supreme court (Citizens United). Impeding the transfer of fiat (infra which should be a utility) is a violation of constitutional rights (arguably) if you're not breaking the law. Even if I disagree with the speech (I do! Vehemently!), rights must be inalienable. Maybe this should be patched in Section 230 legislation versus 18 USC § 1960, would have to read more statute to provide a prop…
Just to make sure I've covered all my bases here: If this was about denying services to a protected class, then you'd have a different response for a different reason -- businesses cannot discriminate on the basis of a protected class. But political beliefs are not a protected class.
As for changing Section 230. The Senate could certainly do all sorts of things to change the way this works. It's clearly an interstate commerce issue, so the federal government could pass all sorts of laws. I don't have an opinion one way or another about how they'd do it, since that's more policy than law.
-JD's opinion.
If some of y'all put the time you spent into defending white supremacists and hate platforms in the name of free speech or independent thought instead into achieving a more just, anti-racist society we'd all be so much better off.
Free speech _always_ has limits. Absolutism is a naïve way to view any aspect of society (whether it's free speech, socialism vs capitalism, etc).
This is good news, but I suspect the "censorship cancel culture" crowd will be chiming in soon.
You say that now, but if the political winds change in future and progressive ideals and orgs are then labeled "hate speech", promoting violence, I suspect there will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
Both sides are not the same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Money is speech, so says the supreme court (Citizens United). Impeding the transfer of fiat (infra which should be a utility) is a violation of constitutional rights (arguably) if you're not breaking the law. Even if I disagree with the speech (I do! Vehemently!), rights must be inalienable. Maybe this should be patched in Section 230 legislation versus 18 USC § 1960, would have to read more statute to provide a prop…
There is so much shortsightedness with the modern pro-censorship crowd. Do they assume censorship will never be applied to their side because they aren't the "evil" ones?
Kaepernick would beg to differ, I suspect.
In the coming years, we may see the rise of separate economies based on political divide. I think this is where we are heading, and this will counterpart the world splitting the internet into nationally divided fragments.
Without Visa, Mastercard or Paypal on the other side how can it survive? Cryptocurrencies as the current niche are hanging on, I suspect for as long as VMP permit them (ie buying bitcoin with a credit card). Everyone else, even Apple, go through them.
Maybe it would be based on cryptocurrency, or a more traditional form of currency that is centralized but isn't USD, for instance. Or someone with a lot of money decides that having dominance over a new economy takes the opportunity and forms their own "competitor" to Visa, but it operates within the economy that Visa decides it doesn't want to be a part of. Then again, maybe Visa one day leaks enough customers that it decides it's not worth being as moralistic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I mean, when they were banned from twitter, people said "build your own twitter", when they built gab and got banned from credit cards processors they said "build your own financial system", when they got banned from cloudflare they were told "build your own internet backbone" etc... At which point this is not censorship when companies equivalent to public infra with big public contracts and ties to the governm…
Look, if you get a reputation for entering businesses and shitting on the floor, you'll find yourself banned from all of them eventually. The same is true for online businesses.
If some of y'all put the time you spent into defending white supremacists and hate platforms in the name of free speech or independent thought instead into achieving a more just, anti-racist society we'd all be so much better off.
If some of y'all put the time you spent into defending white supremacists and hate platforms in the name of free speech or independent thought instead into achieving a more just, anti-racist society we'd all be so much better off.
“Anti-racist” is brand of explicit racial discrimination dressed up as civil rights activism.
And no, "we" would not "all be so much better off" for having licked Kendi's boot instead of upholding the sanctity of basic civil rights that enable the very activism (good or bad) that you're talking about.