Live data from Hacker News

Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patricians of internet discourse

bombthrower.com

1–10 of 264 posts

Re: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patricians of internet discourse

#4

There was another submission a few minutes ago in the same light. It linked to an article about how Big Tech companies are censoring doctors and decide what is accurate medical information. It was removed.

Maybe it was flagged to death. Maybe it will be back. All I know is when these type of stories come out two things are assured. 1) Shenanigans do take place. 2) The powers that be definitely don’t like it if you notice and talk about these shenanigans.

Re: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patricians of internet discourse

#5
This is rehashing the old "common carrier" debate again, isn't it? Which of these are the common carriers: Physical wire/connectivity provider? ISP? Tier1 ISPs? Social media sites connecting messages with other folks?

Where is the line drawn, and what responsibility does each level have?

Re: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patricians of internet discourse

#6
It'd be nice if the plumbing worked together.

I'd like to be able to export data easily, run my own programs easily, write software that doesn't get taxed or asked to be resubmitted (since when did Microsoft charge for Windows app development?)

Every company purports to be for you, but it's a big toothy grinned lie. Some of them sell you, others sell you out.

It also sucks that these companies surface the worst of humanity to drive engagement. Are people really this terrible?

Tech started to sour in 2005.

Re: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patricians of internet discourse

#8
I remain confused as to why anyone thinks they have unlimited first amendment rights on social media. It sounds a lot like thinking one has first amendment rights at a private employer. Let's clear this up right now. TLDR: you don't unless you explicitly do.

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/setting-the-record-straigh...

Edit: keep bringing those freethinker(tm) downvotes. It won't change the law one bit, but I guess it gives good feels.

I mean you could also try starting your own social media network that absolutely guarantees first amendment rights, but so far only hilarity has ensued from that premise along the lines of tragedy plus time equals comedy. You could be the first one to prove them all wrong. What's stopping you?

Or if that's too hard, why don't you all apply to work at Facebook and Twitter? Then you can work your way up the ladder until you can depose Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg. And on the first day of your reign of your new empire you can proclaim to all shareholders and employees that your social media site is entirely unregulated. Otherwise WTH should these companies care about you? You won't build anything and you won't do the work to change the path of something already built.

Re: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patricians of internet discourse

#9

This is rehashing the old "common carrier" debate again, isn't it? Which of these are the common carriers: Physical wire/connectivity provider? ISP? Tier1 ISPs? Social media sites connecting messages with other folks? Where is the line drawn, and what responsibility does each level have?

You can't use the common carrier argument to force someone to be a common carrier. If you pick and choose your clients based on policy you are by definition not a common carrier. Mailchimp is a private carrier. They choose what to carry.
Post reply on HN