81–90 of 189 posts
You can't pick and choose your censorship and government intervention.
I don't expect to convince those who are used to make "rules for thee but not for me"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Mastodon might be similar to what you're describing?
Yeah I've heard about it and will be looking into this. But I haven't actually ever seen it in the wild anywhere online which makes me wonder why it hasn't gained traction much. For a country like India, the solution needs to be dead simple. Exploring a mastadon server a bit, it doesn't feel like it would cut it.
Shocking. What do the pro censorship people say all the time when defending Facebook or Twitter: speech is free but not free from consequences. I believe that's the line.
The Indian government's position is perfectly in line with so-called free speech defenders: they are shutting down illegal content, not applying their own judgement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First the wire is known to be very alt-left but even then the patient didn't had any requirement for oxygen, his grandfather died of heart-attack. Not sure which part of article or twitter thread says a normal guy got screwed up ?
Here's the tweet: https://twitter.com/khanumarfa/status/1386757457393770496?s=... It's in the article as well. The text message was tweeted out. I understand the wire can be considered left-leaning but does that automatically make everything they report on as false? You can ignore their "alt-left" opinion but screenshots of texts and tweets are actual facts that happened.
[1]https://twitter.com/elsamariedsilva/status/13867600304818954... [2] https://twitter.com/amethipolice/status/1386982878328758273?...
Shocking. What do the pro censorship people say all the time when defending Facebook or Twitter: speech is free but not free from consequences. I believe that's the line.
I believe you're: A) using a strawman B) Comparing apples and oranges When facebook decides on its own to remove posts, I'm ok with that, they're a private company and can do what they want on their platform. When the government tells FB to remove posts, I'm not mad at FB; they can do what they want on their platform. I'm mad at the government for telling them to do that.
Shocking. What do the pro censorship people say all the time when defending Facebook or Twitter: speech is free but not free from consequences. I believe that's the line.
I believe you're: A) using a strawman B) Comparing apples and oranges When facebook decides on its own to remove posts, I'm ok with that, they're a private company and can do what they want on their platform. When the government tells FB to remove posts, I'm not mad at FB; they can do what they want on their platform. I'm mad at the government for telling them to do that.
Censorship is censorship. No one cares about narrowly defining Freedom of Speech as conflated with the 1st Amendment except Americans .. and especially Americans who support censorship on giant monopolistic platforms.
Indian Government recently made Twitter do similar things. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/apr/26/twitter-under-... Do you know what's worst? A guy was booked yesterday for Tweeting he needed oxygen cylinders which according to a state government is spreading fake news. https://thewire.in/government/amethi-up-police-arfa-khanum-s... While COVID hasn't been kind to the people of India, The current regime's atte…
I don't know why twitter does this. From https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/25/business/india-covid19-tw... One of the tweets removed from view was posted by Moloy Ghatak, a labor minister in the opposition-ruled West Bengal state, where Mr. Modi’s party hopes to make big gains in an ongoing election. Mr. Ghatak accused Mr. Modi of “mismanagement” and held him directly responsible for the deaths. His tweet included imag…
A reality of scaring social media companies with regulatory threats.
People call for regulation and unsurprisingly their priority becomes keeping those who might regulate them happy with them.
The willingness of the big social networks and Google to submit to authoritarian rulers makes it obvious that any difficulties we have in the US with them are a legislative failure, not a Silicon Valley one. They're not evil, or twisted, they're sociopathic; they'll do whatever they're told, but we refuse to decide what to tell them. They'd love to be made into common carriers as long as they could still run ads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe you're: A) using a strawman B) Comparing apples and oranges When facebook decides on its own to remove posts, I'm ok with that, they're a private company and can do what they want on their platform. When the government tells FB to remove posts, I'm not mad at FB; they can do what they want on their platform. I'm mad at the government for telling them to do that.
So when democrats drag zuck in front of congress and ask why he isn't banning more right wingers, no government coercion?
Bottom line: Silicon Valley techies often suffer from a lack of education in civic matters and liberal democratic values in particular. They believe as long as Bad People have their, here's another term they often use, megaphones, taken away, then ethically it's a thumbs up.
The lack of civic education and historical education becomes evident when you ask them, OK, you support censorship and cleansing misinformation: now who decides?