Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a) Should twitter be allowed to cancel accounts who harm twitter? Although some people agree that is the question, it is not the fundamental one here. Most of the respectable arguments are that Twitter's bans are senselessly harming Twitter. They're building a gaping hole in their offering that a competitor can cover.
The thing is, few other companies will do business with anyone trying to compete with Twitter. Parler was nuked. Gab was almost nuked, but they've managed to survive. There's a huge demand for alternatives to Twitter, but other major tech companies, the corporate press, and many politicians are doing everything in their power to crush those alternatives and prevent them from springing up.
Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
271–280 of 335 posts
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
It all boils down to this: a) Should twitter be allowed to cancel accounts who harm twitter? If yes: b) Who decides which accounts harm twitter? If the answer is "twitter", then they have effectively the right to terminate any account at their will. I don't know what other answer is possible for b) except maybe "the courts", and I'm not sure I like that one. If the answer to a) is no, for which companies does this ap…
If Twitter were just a few million users or something, I'd subscribe to the "they're a private entity, let them do what they want", but they monopolize a huge portion of our national (indeed, international) dialogue to the effect that they can unilaterally influence election outcomes for the world's most powerful democracies (at least that's the implication if you subscribe to the 'Russia manipulated Twitter algos in…
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
You live in a town with no fresh water, and the only drinks available are sold by the local store. This store does not sell bottled water, wine, orange juice, milk, or tea. The only drinks it sells are Coca-Cola and Pepsi. But if you don't like Coca-Cola, just buy Pepsi - how silly it would be to complain of monopoly when you still have a choice!
To extend the analogy so it's more accurate: or you could go to the local stream and drink some water (host your own speech).
Farmers rely on access to groundwater for the cultivation of their crops. but since Coca-Cola's arrival, they have been confronted with a serious decline in water levels. [...] documents from the government's water ministry show that water levels remained stable from 1995 until 2000, when the Coca-Cola plant became operational. Water levels then dropped by almost 10 metres over the following five years.
https://waronwant.org/news-analysis/coca-cola-drinking-world...
The company was blamed for depleting the local supply of water even in communities where it did not have operations
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/05/31/h...
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
And ISPs were not common carriers until they were. It was only meant for the layer underneath them: telcos. The world changes and we should not be stuck with the technology of the 80s until the end of time.
actually they were from the start, or more accurately telcos were required to provide their lines for ISPs.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#275Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
actually they were from the start, or more accurately telcos were required to provide their lines for ISPs.
Actually isps weren't common carriers until 2015 and aren't again today: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/14...
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would make sense to combine these ideas with a circuit breaker that only kicks in once you have a certain MAU count. Having it apply to every forum everywhere would suck and be unworkable, but once you're at Facebook/Twitter/Reddit/etc. levels of exposure, there are a different set of interests and responsibilities to society in play.
You seem to be describing a scheme where Twitter is legally required to be very careful about moderation, but Parler isn't, which seems crazy to me. Also, it doesn't address other vehicles for suppressing toxic speech; for instance, no 230 change you come up with is going to obligate cloud providers to do business with Parler and StormFront. I should add a point I should have made earlier, which is that 230 is in no…
That ambiguity is precisely what I try to address. That distinction might not exist now, but it arguably should.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#278Twitter has no business inserting itself into a dispute between Elbakyan and Elsevier et al. Few people would have issues if Twitter shut down the Sci-Hub account after they received a valid court order, but a private monopolist cannot be trusted to be the arbiter of what is permitted speech.
You missed the worldwide vote for the company that should hold the only truths in all matters? Twitter won. Google second and FB third.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
These massive websites/broadcast SMS cannot have it both ways. They cannot seek the protections of being "critical infrastructure" of any sort, common carrier, public forum, etc. and then, at the same time, disable user accounts for any reason just like any other private website. They have to pick one or the other. The arguments I am seeing online are folks who have chosen one or the other and are arguing from their…
you are mixing up net neutrality and a platform. Net Neutrality ensures that ISP do what the name says, providing Internet service without interfering with it, like restricting which sites you can visit. A platform like twitter, facebook, parler. Is something that was created from scratch and is owned by these companies. As of now it's not their duty to allow everyone in. And enforcing it is stepping on their freedom…
Nah, inviting the government to moderate these platforms is the last thing we want. It's bad enough there are only a handful of them, we definitely don't want all that power under one person's control.
Re: Twitter shuts down account of Sci-Hub
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
actually they were from the start, or more accurately telcos were required to provide their lines for ISPs.
Actually isps weren't common carriers until 2015 and aren't again today: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/14...