3 ms·

> It is the reality of the situation that a whole lot of people rely on facebook You're just wrong. The overwhelming majority of people use a variety of commun

> It is the reality of the situation that a whole lot of people rely on facebook You're just wrong. The overwhelming majority of people use a variety of communication services like e-mail, imessage/sms and many others, and this is common knowledge, people who only use Facebook for communication are frankly extremely rare.

stale2002 6y ago
> people who only I am saying that they rely on it more for communication than they do on phone calls. I communicate with people much more over Facebook than I do through actual phone calls, and it would be less of a problem to be banned from ever making phone calls again than it would be to be banned from facebook.
- root_axis 6y ago
  > I am saying that they rely on it more for communication than they do on phone calls. Nobody is talking about phone calls and you know it. It doesn't matter that you use Facebook more than anything else, it doesn't change what Facebook actually is. If you use discord or slack to do most of your communicating that doesn't mean they become utilities, that's just your personal preference.
  - stale2002 6y ago
    > Nobody is talking about phone calls Literally I was the one to bring up this example in the very beginning. It was my example, that I chose at the start. So yes, that is relevant. The fact of the matter is, that me being banned from ever making phone calls again would absolutely be a larger problem for me, and many other people, than if we were banned from using facebook. > It doesn't matter that you use Facebook more than anything else Of course it does. It is a point of comparison, so as to show that it would be a bigger problem to be banned from facebook than it would be to be banned from making phone calls. > that's just your personal preference. I can assure you that there are many people for whom it would be a bigger problem to be banned from facebook than to be banned from making phone calls.
    - root_axis 6y ago
      > It was my example, that I chose at the start. So yes, that is relevant. It's not relevant because you're ignoring the fact that "the phone network" doesn't primarily mean "phone calls" it primarily means "internet access". > The fact of the matter is, that me being banned from ever making phone calls again would absolutely be a larger problem for me Yes, you keep repeating that over and over again (3 times in this response) but what you don't seem to understand is that nobody is forcing you to rely exclusively on a single website for all your communications, that is a self-imposed restriction that isn't meaningful when trying to decide if a website meets the definition of a utility.
      - stale2002 6y ago
        > what you don't seem to understand is that nobody is forcing you to rely exclusively on a single website for all your communications That does not change the fact that it would be a bigger problem for me to be banned from facebook than it would be for me to be banned from making phone calls, lol. So when you say this "nobody is forcing you", you are ignoring the fact that they would be forcing a problem on me that would be larger than if I were banned from making phone calls. So yes. They would be forcing an issue on me that would be larger than if they banned me from making phone calls. > ignoring the fact that "the phone network" Phone systems have fallen under utilities laws since before the internet existed. Therefore the analogy to phone calls is relevant. You can look at home phone line systems. A home phone lines, that gives zero internet access, still falls under utilities laws. Are you aware that a landline, that gives zero internet access, would still have to follow utilities laws? Just want to make sure you are aware of that. > meets the definition of a utility A perfectly reasonable thing to do is compare it to how much a problem it would be to switch from a different utility. A landline, that has no internet access, is a utility. It falls under utilities laws, even if the singular only thing that it does, is make phone calls, without any internet access. Phone calls, without internet, is a utility. And switching away from the system that only allows you to make phone calls, and has no internet, and is therefore a utility, would be easier than switching away from facebook.
        6y ago

stale2002 6y ago

> people who only I am saying that they rely on it more for communication than they do on phone calls. I communicate with people much more over Facebook than I do through actual phone calls, and it would be less of a problem to be banned from ever making phone calls again than it would be to be banned from facebook.

root_axis 6y ago
> I am saying that they rely on it more for communication than they do on phone calls. Nobody is talking about phone calls and you know it. It doesn't matter that you use Facebook more than anything else, it doesn't change what Facebook actually is. If you use discord or slack to do most of your communicating that doesn't mean they become utilities, that's just your personal preference.
- stale2002 6y ago
  > Nobody is talking about phone calls Literally I was the one to bring up this example in the very beginning. It was my example, that I chose at the start. So yes, that is relevant. The fact of the matter is, that me being banned from ever making phone calls again would absolutely be a larger problem for me, and many other people, than if we were banned from using facebook. > It doesn't matter that you use Facebook more than anything else Of course it does. It is a point of comparison, so as to show that it would be a bigger problem to be banned from facebook than it would be to be banned from making phone calls. > that's just your personal preference. I can assure you that there are many people for whom it would be a bigger problem to be banned from facebook than to be banned from making phone calls.
  - root_axis 6y ago
    > It was my example, that I chose at the start. So yes, that is relevant. It's not relevant because you're ignoring the fact that "the phone network" doesn't primarily mean "phone calls" it primarily means "internet access". > The fact of the matter is, that me being banned from ever making phone calls again would absolutely be a larger problem for me Yes, you keep repeating that over and over again (3 times in this response) but what you don't seem to understand is that nobody is forcing you to rely exclusively on a single website for all your communications, that is a self-imposed restriction that isn't meaningful when trying to decide if a website meets the definition of a utility.
    - stale2002 6y ago
      > what you don't seem to understand is that nobody is forcing you to rely exclusively on a single website for all your communications That does not change the fact that it would be a bigger problem for me to be banned from facebook than it would be for me to be banned from making phone calls, lol. So when you say this "nobody is forcing you", you are ignoring the fact that they would be forcing a problem on me that would be larger than if I were banned from making phone calls. So yes. They would be forcing an issue on me that would be larger than if they banned me from making phone calls. > ignoring the fact that "the phone network" Phone systems have fallen under utilities laws since before the internet existed. Therefore the analogy to phone calls is relevant. You can look at home phone line systems. A home phone lines, that gives zero internet access, still falls under utilities laws. Are you aware that a landline, that gives zero internet access, would still have to follow utilities laws? Just want to make sure you are aware of that. > meets the definition of a utility A perfectly reasonable thing to do is compare it to how much a problem it would be to switch from a different utility. A landline, that has no internet access, is a utility. It falls under utilities laws, even if the singular only thing that it does, is make phone calls, without any internet access. Phone calls, without internet, is a utility. And switching away from the system that only allows you to make phone calls, and has no internet, and is therefore a utility, would be easier than switching away from facebook.
      - 6y ago