4 ms·

You're arguing as if there were no precedent for this, but there already are bounds to how Apple can "express itself". They cannot refuse to serve people of a c

You're arguing as if there were no precedent for this, but there already are bounds to how Apple can "express itself". They cannot refuse to serve people of a certain race for example. So are we in a dangerous place now, or should Apple be allowed to exclude people by race?

Digory 6y ago
Should Apple have to bake a wedding cake for Parler? Discuss.
danans 6y ago
> So are we in a dangerous place now, or should Apple be allowed to exclude people by race? Race is a protected class per the law. Parler is not
- read_if_gay_ 6y ago
  Which makes zero difference in principle.
  - danans 6y ago
    It makes a world of difference when you consider it in the context of American history. Race and the other legally protected classes have been the biggest factors in discrimination in this country - the biggest ways in which US society has violated its creed "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal". Political party has not, nor has "users of a computer application", nor the intersection of those manifested in Parler. But sure, if you algebraically treat race and political party as equivalents without any historical context, the comparison is "in principle" the same, but that is deeply flawed as it requires the conscious exclusion of historical context.
alkonaut 6y ago
Which group of people is banned from the App Store though? If group A can publish an app following the guidelines and group B is banned while adhering to the same guidelines, that’s clearly discrimination of group B. But if group A and B both are stopped from breaking guidelines equally then how is it discrimination? Guidelines could be written to be exclusive (no apps can use Swahili!) but that’s not what’s going on here is it? Guidelines are neutral. People who think there is a ban on Trump supporters or Conservatives must be seeing something I don’t.

Digory 6y ago

Should Apple have to bake a wedding cake for Parler? Discuss.

danans 6y ago

> So are we in a dangerous place now, or should Apple be allowed to exclude people by race? Race is a protected class per the law. Parler is not

read_if_gay_ 6y ago
Which makes zero difference in principle.
- danans 6y ago
  It makes a world of difference when you consider it in the context of American history. Race and the other legally protected classes have been the biggest factors in discrimination in this country - the biggest ways in which US society has violated its creed "We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal". Political party has not, nor has "users of a computer application", nor the intersection of those manifested in Parler. But sure, if you algebraically treat race and political party as equivalents without any historical context, the comparison is "in principle" the same, but that is deeply flawed as it requires the conscious exclusion of historical context.

alkonaut 6y ago

Which group of people is banned from the App Store though? If group A can publish an app following the guidelines and group B is banned while adhering to the same guidelines, that’s clearly discrimination of group B. But if group A and B both are stopped from breaking guidelines equally then how is it discrimination? Guidelines could be written to be exclusive (no apps can use Swahili!) but that’s not what’s going on here is it? Guidelines are neutral. People who think there is a ban on Trump supporters or Conservatives must be seeing something I don’t.