Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#31

Post by rurounijones »

cnphil wrote: post #6
GauntletWizard wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, really, no. Russian users will notice that Twitter is being blocked by the government a lot more than they'll notice that a few tweets have been blocked. Twitter has the position, and responsibility, to play hardball with these governments. A few days of lost revenue from a Russian block is nothing compared to the lost revenue from an entire nation under tyranny. Only in China do you have a population so brainwas…

I'm from China and I just don't know how to refute your last line. Google has been blocked for about half a month now, but average people would not feel a thing about it. That's just sad.

I think that is because China has such a home grown ecosystem for google/twitter etc. alternatives

Russia? Not so much I think.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#32

Post by bowlofpetunias »

mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

No thanks. I don't trust corporations like Twitter any more than governments.

All of the dominant American online service already come with their own built-in ideological censorship, usually under the euphemism "family-friendly". (Twitter is actually one of the most tolerant services.)

People can challenge the governments of their own countries quite well, thankyouverymuch. It may take time, but in the end they are a big fat easy target.

Challenging global corporations is a lot more terrifying. So far the only thing that has helped us fight back has been... governments.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#33

Post by hayksaakian »

mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

Its not really twitter vs the government, its twitter vs companies that control / influence / lobby the government

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#34

Post by dan_bk »

mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

> Maybe companies / corporations with enough power to actually challenge the governments of the world isn't such a bad thing after all.

We should never expect corporations to take on the role of challenging the government. In "democracies", this is the role of the citizen (whose responsibility is to vote). Corporations, on the other hand, are controlled by people with lots of money whose goal it is to make even more money.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#35

Post by devcpp »

mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

The view makes sense. We don't want it to happen because it's unlikely to go well. But if it does happen that corporations acquire power, we express our wish that it goes well, however unlikely that is.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#36

Post by kalleboo »

rurounijones wrote: post #31
cnphil wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm from China and I just don't know how to refute your last line. Google has been blocked for about half a month now, but average people would not feel a thing about it. That's just sad.

I think that is because China has such a home grown ecosystem for google/twitter etc. alternatives Russia? Not so much I think.

Yandex is the 4th largest search engine in the world and #1 in Russia. I'm pretty sure they have a large local social network as well but the name has slipped my mind.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#37

Post by kingbaal »

dan_bk wrote: post #34
mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

> Maybe companies / corporations with enough power to actually challenge the governments of the world isn't such a bad thing after all. We should never expect corporations to take on the role of challenging the government. In "democracies", this is the role of the citizen (whose responsibility is to vote). Corporations, on the other hand, are controlled by people with lots of money whose goal it is to make even more…

Yes, but countries like Russia and Pakistan can hardly be called liberal democracies. If there is no free speech, then it is difficult for citizens of those countries to take action. That is where corporations challenging the government can be helpful.

I don't see why we shouldn't expect corporations to take on the role of challenging the government. It is in Twitter's interest for governments not to crack down on free speech. So when governments do crack down, it is in their interest to stand up to those governments, especially when they don't have any employees or assets in those countries.

One worry would be that the Russian government could threaten Twitter with cyberattacks.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#38

Post by maaku »

mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

> Maybe companies / corporations with enough power to actually challenge the governments of the world isn't such a bad thing after all. Or, perhaps it would be better to say "maybe corporations with enough power to challenge the governments of the world" is, at least, not a universally bad thing.

Please review the history of the various "East India" companies. I think you will find it an enlightening read.

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#39

Post by kruczek »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #30
mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

Democratic governments are at least notionally beholden to their people. I realize that's something of a bread-and-circuses fantasy, but at the very least they have to act like they're listening and taking action, or they get voted out next election. Corporations are under no such compulsion. Their sole motive is profit. Put Wal-Mart in charge, and they'll happily kill half the population and feed them to the other h…

I'd argue that democratic governments use populism to stay in power in a similar way as corporations use marketing to make profit. In both cases they seek to make masses happy enough to maintain their status quo.

On a related note, if we look at corporations as nations with citizens being their employees, then actually they work in a more similar way to a government - they usually provide healthcare, define certain laws (as in, rules and dependencies within the corporation itself) and seek to make their employees happy (or else employees will go to other company). And additionally people don't get so zealously protective about their corporations as they do about nations, so maybe rather than waging wars they would choose to simply change the corporation they are in.

Well, I certainly don't say we should make a change in this direction though; it's simply a thought I find interesting, how corporations provide to their employees some of the things similarly as the government does (and sometimes provide even though the government should, but doesn't).

Re: Twitter Steps Down From the Free Speech Party

#40

Post by mushishi »

mindcrime wrote: post #18

It's funny how a lot of people (especially those of the anti-capitalist / left'ish wing ilk) cite cyberpunk literature in which corporations achieve a level of power approaching - or exceeding - that of Nation States... and decry that hypothetical scenario as a horrible and undesirable thing. But in this case, what we see is a situation where we'd like to see Twitter stand up to various world governments... perhaps e…

Why concentrate power at all? How about we disperse the power, so that the power one has diminishes outside his nation city (size of which is determined approximately by how much one can move in a day). And limit power so that you cannot cumulate it to achieve anything globally drastic unless lots of time passes, or most of people have same need.

Rather than having indirect power that can be stolen, people need direct local power that has consequences with transparent effects.

Big nations, and corporations, we allow them to exist, and some of us, sometimes myself, think they are good for us. It just makes me sad how passive and accepting we are in this regard, and how current culture enables small companies quickly rise to into position to serve yet another brand of Soma.

Post reply on HN