5 ms·
This kind of argument is starting to piss me off. "You can express your freedom of speech, but not in this public park, because it's privately owned" "You c
by John_KZ 9y ago
This kind of argument is starting to piss me off.
"You can express your freedom of speech, but not in this public park, because it's privately owned"
"You can state your opinions, but not on this website, because dispite being a major communications hub on the internet, and despite advertising ourselves as a place of free expression, we actively derank, ban or erase any opinion we dislike"
"You can decline the EULA, you just have to stop using our vital service"
"You can maintain your privacy, but not if you want to travel"
"You can buy a phone that doesn't collect metadata about you, you just have to break a $50 billion dollar lobby and manufacture your own IC. You still have the freedom of choice"
You know what, you really don't. Your rights aren't supposed to be just a legal burden to circumvent with various tricks, they're supposed to hold in all domains of public life. I want to be able to fly in a plane without having some asshole dig through my personal life. You think someone is dangerous? Check for bombs. Check for weapons. Why are they checking for beliefs? What kind of bullshit is this?
- jonathanyc 9y agoYeah. We accept that “if you don’t like it, you should just move” is a bad excuse for bad laws. But people still think they are so urbane and clever when they say “oh, if you don’t like (service X), just don’t use it.”