61–70 of 1001 posts
There's an amusing irony in the downvotes in this thread. The champions of free-speech angry that Apple might ban a platform for speech that ultimately led to an attempted insurrection? These champions of free speech seem to be agressively trying to silence anybody happy about this news.
What was the insurrection? Some protestors got into the Capitol building. Don't make it out like it's more than it is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm sure we'll see free speech absolutists in arms about this, but today is a good day for democracy. Yeah, I think I'm done with this industry. When did everyone become a fascist all of a sudden? Edit: Fascism literally means big corporations and governments imposing a moral structure on society. What Apple is doing is fascist. It's also stupidly anticompetitive by not booting Facebook and Twitter off for the same…
> Yeah, I think I'm done with this industry. When did everyone become a fascist all of a sudden? Ever since SJW decided that if you weren't with them, you were against them, ie. you were a fascist.
Seems inconsistent to me to ban Parler and not Twitter. Also seems undesirable for a phone manufacturer to tell me what software I should or shouldn't use.
Parler, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook were definitely used to storm Congress. Snapchat, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter and Facebook also were definitely used to burn down parts of Minneapolis, Chicago, and LA. Massive Big Tech conglomerates must be busted through antitrust enforcement and Section 230 must be updated to ban predatory algorithms which have inflamed 7 years of sectarian chaos. It's not a free speech issue:…
> Snapchat, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter and Facebook also were definitely used to burn down parts of Minneapolis, Chicago, and LA. Source? Edit: lol at the downvotes. Anytime someone talks about something obvious regarding society/wealth inequality, all the wannabe Elon Musks come out to demand sources. But infringe on their dear property rights or otherwise critique the current economic system, and oh boy, they have…
There's an amusing irony in the downvotes in this thread. The champions of free-speech angry that Apple might ban a platform for speech that ultimately led to an attempted insurrection? These champions of free speech seem to be agressively trying to silence anybody happy about this news.
Parler, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook were definitely used to storm Congress. Snapchat, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter and Facebook also were definitely used to burn down parts of Minneapolis, Chicago, and LA. Massive Big Tech conglomerates must be busted through antitrust enforcement and Section 230 must be updated to ban predatory algorithms which have inflamed 7 years of sectarian chaos. It's not a free speech issue:…
It’s sounds dystopian but I want a complete crackdown of this trump nonsense. I don’t want my kids to grow up with these idiots nor do I want Trumpism ever to be anywhere near my family. Trump has destroyed America. Ban him from every platform.
Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…
Yah. IMO-- only the most directly dangerous stuff -- incitements to violence-- should be removed. If you chase them out of Twitter, they'll make an even worse echo-chamber. > Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. > If you deny them the usual channels, is it surprising that they take the other route? On the other hand, if what they're asserting is crazy and unsupported by…
FWIW, I think alternatives to Twitter, like Parler and Mastodon, are a good idea, but Parler acts like they have a fair takedown process when it's evident that it is not working particularly well.
I'm honestly curious - where is the line drawn between a service being used to do "questionable" things and it being removed? We can all agree, for example, that the internet at large enables many bad things, but I doubt any of us would ban the internet (though in other countries this happens). What about reddit? A specific subreddit? A specific post? A specific user? A specific post by a specific user at a specific…
1. Be deplatformed
2. called a racist
3. called a pedophile
4. have my life threatened
that's the state of politics in this country. Thank you Media.
We need something decentralized and bullet-proof. Enough of these charlatans.