11–13 of 13 posts
The article in the Register is more interesting: https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/07/florida_man_sues_soci...
It seems like these media companies have abandoned all optics of trying to be unbiased and objective. How they claim to be "Independent news and views for the tech community" is beyond me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is not a restriction on private companies banning individuals from their platforms, whether the reasons are ideological or not. So, Rosa Parks should have just started her own bus company too? Discriminating against people based on race was legal after all. Railroads, telecom, electricity and water companies should be able to refuse service too? Are you against the FDA, EPA, FCC, FEC, COPPA regulations, regulati…
> So, Rosa Parks should have just started her own bus company too? Discriminating against people based on race was legal after all. Trump (and others) were banned for specific causes, not for something they were born with and can't control. It's ludicrous to suggest that ideas should be protected classes in commerce just like race is. No one is born a liberal or conservative, and those labels can change over time. Yo…
Religions are ideas. These companies also protect certain religions and don't protect others. Hypocrisy at its finest. Also based on studies, our political view points are built based on our brain activities (which are built based on experiences).
> Clarence Thomas's opinion is based on the premise that social media companies are the same as utilities like electric companies, which is nonsense. You can start a social media company tomorrow and everyone could switch to it.
Yes, you, a random person on the internet who misses Thomas' view point must know more than the most experienced Supreme Court Justice of the United States. Your "go start your own company" excuse is what Parler & Gab did and they got kicked out by Apple and Google and banks. I guess Parler should just started a phone company and a bank too right? Railroad and telecom companies could have also just "gone and started their own company" right? You would be the type of person few decades ago telling blacks and jews to just "go start your own company".
Fauci, a government employee is working with Facebook to censor valid viewpoints and you are totally cool with it.
> The same is not true of any utilities in the US. Some are even impossible to compete with (e.g. broadcast networks) because they use limited public resources (e.g. spectrum) granted by the government.
You really think one can compete with Google/YouTube's 95%+ monopoly? Wait until the government gets run by your political opponent.
> You can also just... not say anything, and no one will know which one of those you are.
And you call your political opponents authoritarians? Lol. You think Trillion dollar companies are the good guys and the 50%+ population which is censored are just peasants who should go build their own companies. Rich elites must be the good guys! Lol. Wait until the political pendulum swings in the other direction. Only then will you learn your lesson.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It is not a restriction on private companies I think this is an irrelevant argument. Why Congress was concerned by foreign interference then? Private companies should have had some social responsibility if they stepped into social area. Or, they should have banned all non-US residents as well. Why Trump only? Actually, these details aren't interesting to me. A lot was already said about that, no point to say more.…
> Why Congress was concerned by foreign interference then? Congress was concerned because it was foreign interference in an election , not because of the First Amendment. This is totally irrelevant. > Private companies should have had some social responsibility if they stepped into social area. Of course. But the First Amendment says that the government cannot compel social media to carry Trump's message if they don'…
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=anti+kavanaugh+protest+capitol&t=h...
And I won't even mention the riots from last year. Seems like violence is okay as long as it's from the "protected elites" side.