2 ms·
Because it wouldn't be a free service. It would be funded by your money. How mad are you going to get when your money goes to host those views you find repellen
by slowmovintarget 8y ago
Because it wouldn't be a free service. It would be funded by your money. How mad are you going to get when your money goes to host those views you find repellent?
When the inevitable happens and the content needs to be monitored (can't have government funds used to host things like doxing blog posts, for example), then how much will you pay?
Governments don't hand out free stuff. They take your stuff to pay for it.
- tehjoker 8y agoRight, of course it's not free, but it would be cheap to provide and a universal good for all US residents. I also don't really mind the taxes they can come from the rich anyway. So long as the views expressed don't cross the line into violence or ethnic cleansing, I'm in favor of the first amendment. Yes, some manual curation will be necessary, but it's irrelevant to me if society as a whole pays for it or a company. It seems to me a free service for everyone is a better deal that has knock on benefits for public debate.
- SllX 8y agoNo. It probably won’t have knock on benefits for public debate. The government already has channels for expressing your views to them, and society has always shouldered the distribution cost of their own views. Making hosting free is unlikely to benefit anyone and more likely to actually hurt the First Amendment. Just like we have a division of Church and State, we are better off having a division between Blog and State.