3 ms·
My point was not that you "must" have a job to survive. It is that for most intents and purposes, you must have a job to participate in modern society. Giving u
by DubiousPusher 6y ago
My point was not that you "must" have a job to survive. It is that for most intents and purposes, you must have a job to participate in modern society. Giving up a job in most senses means giving up a place in society. The same, at least in my opinion, is untrue of social media.
I certainly never said there were no such thing as labor laws.
I agree regarding Twitter being subject to the same rules as other media companies. I think the "editor vs platform" argument is the kind of thing lawyers love to wax on about and is otherwise sophistic nonsense. A platform under centralized power is a publication, period. Its maintainers are its editors.
I don't think Twitter is good or should even be left to its own devices necessarily. I just don't happen to think it is all that special or important. I think if we're not doing anything about traditional media conglomerates we shouldn't do anything about Twitter either.
But I don't have any problem rethinking how massive we let certain industry players grow or realizing that size itself can be a problem. As I said in another part of this thread.
> Personally, I am not opposed to restructuring the relationship of the individual to big corporate businesses. But at the same time we have to be honest about the fact that this isn't really something all that special. And if we want do this kind of restructuring to social media, we should consider those changes within an entire landscape of companies that reap all kinds of benefit from society and externalize all kinds of costs onto it.