3 ms·

> If they don't delete tweets like that, they get shit for not intervening when the public is obviously put in harm's way. Nobody voted for twitter to be the p

> If they don't delete tweets like that, they get shit for not intervening when the public is obviously put in harm's way. Nobody voted for twitter to be the protector of the public. That's the job of the elected official. That's why we have elections. If the public suffers, the fault lies with the official, not twitter. Why bother having elections, democracy, etc. Why not just let twitter and the tech elites rule over us? Zuckerburg, Wojcicki and Dorsey should form a triumvirate and rule over us. Tell us what to think, how to think, when to think, etc.

Legogris 7y ago
I also think there's something to be said for not putting Twitter - or any other company - in that position in the first place. We need to put more concerted resources into building decentralized alternatives. https://scuttlebutt.nz/ https://scuttlebutt.nz/ is one such initiative. There are no unsolved theoretical fundamentals here - we "just" need to build product and make it scale.
rbanffy 7y ago
> Nobody voted for twitter to be the protector of the public. And Twitter owns the platform he uses to spread dangerous disinformation to further his own political agenda. A car rental company has every right to ban you from their fleet if you repeatedly kill pedestrians with their cars.
- mantas 7y ago
  Make Twitter (and Youtube while at it) a public utility. Can telephone company cut you off for spreading disinformation? Can a toll road refuse you if you're driving to "spread dangerous disinformation" at a rally?
evgen 7y ago
They vote for Twitter to keep doing what it is doing every second of every day in numbers far greater than participate in any national election. Don't like it? Well, last I checked no one is forcing you to use Twitter, so I am sure you can find the door all by yourself.
- rbanffy 7y ago
  > Don't like it? Well, last I checked no one is forcing you to use Twitter I imagined how evil someone would need to be in order to be banned from Gab. Bolsonaro would be perfectly at home there.

Legogris 7y ago

I also think there's something to be said for not putting Twitter - or any other company - in that position in the first place. We need to put more concerted resources into building decentralized alternatives. https://scuttlebutt.nz/ https://scuttlebutt.nz/ is one such initiative. There are no unsolved theoretical fundamentals here - we "just" need to build product and make it scale.

rbanffy 7y ago

> Nobody voted for twitter to be the protector of the public. And Twitter owns the platform he uses to spread dangerous disinformation to further his own political agenda. A car rental company has every right to ban you from their fleet if you repeatedly kill pedestrians with their cars.

mantas 7y ago
Make Twitter (and Youtube while at it) a public utility. Can telephone company cut you off for spreading disinformation? Can a toll road refuse you if you're driving to "spread dangerous disinformation" at a rally?

evgen 7y ago

They vote for Twitter to keep doing what it is doing every second of every day in numbers far greater than participate in any national election. Don't like it? Well, last I checked no one is forcing you to use Twitter, so I am sure you can find the door all by yourself.

rbanffy 7y ago
> Don't like it? Well, last I checked no one is forcing you to use Twitter I imagined how evil someone would need to be in order to be banned from Gab. Bolsonaro would be perfectly at home there.