231–235 of 235 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have to ask - by "diverse", do you mean "different people from different backgrounds who have different viewpoints"? Or do you mean "people who all think the same way but have different skin colors"?
Different backgrounds does not imply different viewpoints. Different viewpoints does not imply different backgrounds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People speak of "the algorithm" as if it were an animal spirit or American god to appease and to implore. I suppose this is our zeitgeist.
It basically is at this point. Every time one of these companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter...etc get caught doing something dodgy they just say it was the algorithm's fault and call it a day. Like when Facebook was selling ads to anti-semites or Google just banning people from their services for undisclosed reasons.
I think the aggressiveness that the EU attacks big tech with is proof enough that the national security point is true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The lines are clearer than ever for the 21st century. This century has been kicked off with the world struggle between democracy and totalitarianism. People have a choice. Choose the US/Europe/Japan/South Korea/Taiwan, or, the mideast/Russia/China. Many people voted with their feet, migrating to the former nations. Those people have no room to speak as they already voted. I'm missing some players of course, but gener…
> The middle east similarly never asked for democracy. Oh boy... a blanket statement if ever I saw one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...
Full quote helps.. I realize the Iranian people are far more into neoliberalism than their leaders are, and that not everyone in that part of the world desires Sharia Law over neoliberalism. I certainly did not intend to insult those that do desire freedom / representative government in the region. But I do believe they're in the minority.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think so, but to indulge my own cranky theories: Perhaps Elon Musk's takeover attempt was done at the behest of the US government to take control of the platform under the cover of "censorship". Musk himself indicated he wanted to make the platform more miserable for the "extremes" on both the left and right (both perceived as being anti-government) - leaving you with the establishment consensus unharmed in t…
That's a cool idea. Largely speaking you can see Elon's point of view. He was on Babylon Bee's show. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvGnw1sHh9M 2.4 million views in last 3 months. In this video they in detail discuss the problem with political banning. 2 months later, Babylon Bee got banned off twitter for a joke. Clear political banning and violation of section 230.
This has been posted a bunch of times, and it's wrong. Section 230 doesn't prohibit political bannings. It doesn't actually prohibit any banning at all.
This is the relevant section (from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230).
> (2) Civil liability > No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of— > (A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or > availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, > lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise > objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected;
Even banning for constitutionally protected speech is explicitly allowed.
Whether that's a good thing or not is a separate conversation, but nothing presently in section 230 would prevent Twitter/Facebook/etc from banning an entire political party.