111–120 of 763 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That said, maybe it's best if NYPost stays off Twitter. You believe it would be best if public discourse became even more of a one-sided echo chamber? Why is that?
Way to extrapolate an entire faction of society based on one action of a tabloid.
Care to correct your typo so we can figure out what you're trying to say here?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter is an infrastructure on top of which thousands of services are run. It's a notification service, it's a messaging server, it's an authentication/identify verification service, it's a news dissemination and discussion service, etc. But that actually doesn't even damage the argument: would it be okay if Google decided that they didn't like NyPost's politics, so they disabled the functionality of all of their ne…
No. Google is different. They hold a monopoly on search that I think should be broken up. I have big problems with the power Google wields in finding things online. But, going back to my previous comment, it would in a way be a good thing if Google started capriciously "disappearing" sites like this, in a high-profile manner. It would accelerate the move to other search providers and bring a more diversified Internet…
To the people constantly saying that twitter is a private company and should be allowed to do whatever they want: Would you support the same idea around electrical power? If the power company providing the power to the office at the NyPost decided that they had a political disagreement with them, would it be okay to just cut off their power? NyPost could just make their own power, of course, by purchasing a generator…
Power companies are regulated monopolies. There are no competitors. Twitter is in no way even close to the only way to publish something. It is no where near as difficult to publish on a different platform than it is to generate your own power. If an ISP was cutting off the NyPost, I would have issues with that. If they had their domain name seized, I would have an issue with that. If other ISPs blocked network route…
The reason these technologies are successful is that 99% of "publishing" is getting messages to the eyeballs that want to see those messages. The essence of their monopoly is that everyone's content they want to see is on that particular platform, both political and apolitical. It is difficult to follow people who get excommunicated from platforms, and the whole reason anyone uses these platforms is to avoid this difficulty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That said, maybe it's best if NYPost stays off Twitter. You believe it would be best if public discourse became even more of a one-sided echo chamber? Why is that?
I'm not sure that "everyone except the NYPost" constitutes a single side. That said, it's Twitter's ball. They can play with it however they please.
That was never implied.
To the people constantly saying that twitter is a private company and should be allowed to do whatever they want: Would you support the same idea around electrical power? If the power company providing the power to the office at the NyPost decided that they had a political disagreement with them, would it be okay to just cut off their power? NyPost could just make their own power, of course, by purchasing a generator…
The right solution is that people should move off of Twitter and leave that wretched garbage platform in the dust. I wrote this the other day, but people have already pointed out tons of problems with it and I tend to agree with those issues: https://battlepenguin.com/tech/the-solution-to-big-tech-isnt... The reality is they have massive market share. Keep in mind, Facebook and Twitter prevented the spread of this st…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter is not a utility. It is not common infrastructure. The Internet is, and I would not be okay with Internet access being terminated over political disagreements. But individual services? Sure, why not? For those who argue that Twitter is a de facto common platform, well these decisions are moving them away from that role. The more they exercise their own prerogatives in removing content, the more they're no lon…
Twitter is an infrastructure on top of which thousands of services are run. It's a notification service, it's a messaging server, it's an authentication/identify verification service, it's a news dissemination and discussion service, etc. But that actually doesn't even damage the argument: would it be okay if Google decided that they didn't like NyPost's politics, so they disabled the functionality of all of their ne…
They _run_ on public infrastructure, just like a store or restaurant. That should be available to all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Has criticism of the current president been banned?
More like mandated. But, I repeat, what happens when it's "our side" in power? Would leaks about malfeasance under his administration be "improperly sourced information"?
To the people constantly saying that twitter is a private company and should be allowed to do whatever they want: Would you support the same idea around electrical power? If the power company providing the power to the office at the NyPost decided that they had a political disagreement with them, would it be okay to just cut off their power? NyPost could just make their own power, of course, by purchasing a generator…