3 ms·

Yes, it's related to free speech, but I just want to point out that it has nothing to do with the US first amendment protections and likely has nothing to do wi

Yes, it's related to free speech, but I just want to point out that it has nothing to do with the US first amendment protections and likely has nothing to do with free speech laws in other areas as well, since those only restrict what government can do. Choosing to disassociate from speech you don't like is yet another use of free speech, as is banning groups that use speech you don't like from your private platform. So yeah, gab, Reddit, and Facebook are exercising their right to free speech.

sneak 8y ago
I think you may be confusing “government infringement upon free speech rights” and the much wider concept of “free speech” in general, which is the ability, provided by common spaces and a soap box, or printing presses, and now by the internet, that permits someone with something to say to reach their audience who wishes to hear them. There are a lot more people who have the ability to shut down a website, regardless of hosting company choice, than have the ability to shut down dissemination of a flyer or stop a speaker from speaking. Yes, a TOS is freedom of association. That doesn’t mean it’s a good thing for society when unpopular speech gets banned from every web host they use, in order.
- mikeash 8y ago
  It’s an interesting question. Speech on the internet does seem to depend on the cooperation of big companies in a way that isn’t seen in other realms. However, this seems to be drifting off topic. Gab’s web site didn’t get shut down, they just got cut off by a payment processor.
  - SamReidHughes 8y ago
    Well now the web site’s getting kicked off Joyent. And, you know, I want the right to choose who I host and who I don’t host if I ran a hosting company. And I’d be happy to host conspiracy theorying white nationalists, but I wouldn’t want to have to transmit child porn wedding cake payments if that were legal.
  - sneak 8y ago
    Their web site is indeed being shut down. :/ I hate Gab and all the nazis they host, but I am troubled about the difficulty in hosting the wider category of unpopular speech.

sneak 8y ago

I think you may be confusing “government infringement upon free speech rights” and the much wider concept of “free speech” in general, which is the ability, provided by common spaces and a soap box, or printing presses, and now by the internet, that permits someone with something to say to reach their audience who wishes to hear them. There are a lot more people who have the ability to shut down a website, regardless of hosting company choice, than have the ability to shut down dissemination of a flyer or stop a speaker from speaking. Yes, a TOS is freedom of association. That doesn’t mean it’s a good thing for society when unpopular speech gets banned from every web host they use, in order.

mikeash 8y ago
It’s an interesting question. Speech on the internet does seem to depend on the cooperation of big companies in a way that isn’t seen in other realms. However, this seems to be drifting off topic. Gab’s web site didn’t get shut down, they just got cut off by a payment processor.
- SamReidHughes 8y ago
  Well now the web site’s getting kicked off Joyent. And, you know, I want the right to choose who I host and who I don’t host if I ran a hosting company. And I’d be happy to host conspiracy theorying white nationalists, but I wouldn’t want to have to transmit child porn wedding cake payments if that were legal.
- sneak 8y ago
  Their web site is indeed being shut down. :/ I hate Gab and all the nazis they host, but I am troubled about the difficulty in hosting the wider category of unpopular speech.