4 ms·

How does this differ from the deplatforming we've recently seen with Twitter, Apple app store, Gab from hosting providers, facebook, youtube, etc?

MysticFear 8y ago
People actually are accused of doing something illegal by law.
- cft 8y ago
  Sorry, "illegal" versus "legal" in America is determined by the courts, not by private corporations.
  - crankylinuxuser 8y ago
    Didn't you get the memo (2016)? Corporations now write the law, and they don't even prevent for impartiality.
- wuliwong 8y ago
  Who are you saying is accused? AT&T or the customers? I don't believe there is any legal proceedings related to any of this? I think OP's point was that if this bothers you and the recent de-platforming of people and websites does not, maybe you should rethink your position. But maybe I misread OP?
- SimplePeople 8y ago
  Accused or convicted?
- myegorov 8y ago
  Not too long ago, homosexuality was criminalized.
rootusrootus 8y ago
There are a lot of platforms to choose from, but my house is only physically connected by one high speed ISP.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- yantz 8y ago
  You can still connect to a low speed ISP much in the same way that people banned from Twitter or YouTube can still use much smaller platforms with a lower reach.
  - rootusrootus 8y ago
    My tax dollars helped pay for the infrastructure that the ISP is selling me service over. It's a little different from Twitter or Youtube, who are just a site on the Internet.
    - yantz 8y ago
      Your tax dollars helped pay for the development of the Internet and many of the technologies that those sites and services use today.
      - rootusrootus 8y ago
        Sure, the development of the technology, but not the actual services themselves. The difference with the local ISP is that my tax dollars actually helped pay for the physical plant. And through my gov't I give them actual physical right-of-way to lay cables and maintain them. This is a very important distinction that does not apply to a soft service on the 'net somewhere. Now, if my tax dollars helped pay for Twitter's datacenter, then now we have something to talk about. And perhaps in the state where Twitter is, they got tax breaks which amount to effectively a subsidy from the citizenry. In that case I think it's time to take the case to court.
beezischillin 8y ago
The piracy issue is very similar to the recent Internet censorship we've seen. A very similar thing happened to the PirateBay (and it still happens to this day), who were persecuted off the internet initially by corporations leveraging politicians to push a website offline that was legal in their home country. Now I'm not saying it's completely the same, but often it seems like the piracy takedowns set up the playbook to censoring things that often affect lots of peoples' lives. I'm very vary of corporate censorship since it's an easy next step for politics and the government to start wielding it against the people. And that could be disastrous.

MysticFear 8y ago

People actually are accused of doing something illegal by law.

cft 8y ago
Sorry, "illegal" versus "legal" in America is determined by the courts, not by private corporations.
- crankylinuxuser 8y ago
  Didn't you get the memo (2016)? Corporations now write the law, and they don't even prevent for impartiality.
wuliwong 8y ago
Who are you saying is accused? AT&T or the customers? I don't believe there is any legal proceedings related to any of this? I think OP's point was that if this bothers you and the recent de-platforming of people and websites does not, maybe you should rethink your position. But maybe I misread OP?
SimplePeople 8y ago
Accused or convicted?
myegorov 8y ago
Not too long ago, homosexuality was criminalized.

rootusrootus 8y ago

There are a lot of platforms to choose from, but my house is only physically connected by one high speed ISP.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
yantz 8y ago
You can still connect to a low speed ISP much in the same way that people banned from Twitter or YouTube can still use much smaller platforms with a lower reach.
- rootusrootus 8y ago
  My tax dollars helped pay for the infrastructure that the ISP is selling me service over. It's a little different from Twitter or Youtube, who are just a site on the Internet.
  - yantz 8y ago
    Your tax dollars helped pay for the development of the Internet and many of the technologies that those sites and services use today.
    - rootusrootus 8y ago
      Sure, the development of the technology, but not the actual services themselves. The difference with the local ISP is that my tax dollars actually helped pay for the physical plant. And through my gov't I give them actual physical right-of-way to lay cables and maintain them. This is a very important distinction that does not apply to a soft service on the 'net somewhere. Now, if my tax dollars helped pay for Twitter's datacenter, then now we have something to talk about. And perhaps in the state where Twitter is, they got tax breaks which amount to effectively a subsidy from the citizenry. In that case I think it's time to take the case to court.

beezischillin 8y ago

The piracy issue is very similar to the recent Internet censorship we've seen. A very similar thing happened to the PirateBay (and it still happens to this day), who were persecuted off the internet initially by corporations leveraging politicians to push a website offline that was legal in their home country. Now I'm not saying it's completely the same, but often it seems like the piracy takedowns set up the playbook to censoring things that often affect lots of peoples' lives. I'm very vary of corporate censorship since it's an easy next step for politics and the government to start wielding it against the people. And that could be disastrous.