3 ms·

This makes me feel like I missed something. Are you writing this because you read the article today or did something else happen?

NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
Today we had 4 tech billionaires/CEOs telling us what politicians we’re allowed to hear from or talk about. That’s not OK.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Today we had 4 tech billionaires/CEOs telling us what politicians we’re allowed to hear from or talk about. Nope, they are telling you who is allowed on their platform. You can hear from or talk about whoever you want.
  - NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
    Let me guess, you’re the type of person who will complain incessantly about the Koch brothers and money in politics and super PACs... and yet here you are gleeful about giving tech oligarchs the effective power to choose the next President.
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > Let me guess, you’re the type of person who will complain incessantly about the Koch brothers and money in politics and super PACs... Well, no, not the way you mean. That is, I think all those things are corrosive within the structure of the present US political system; OTOH, I also think that the ways people propose to constrain them tend to both have side effects as bad or worse than the problems they solve, and violate the First Amendment. > and yet here you are gleeful about giving tech oligarchs the effective power to choose the next President. I disagree that that is the result, and I'm not at all gleeful.
- samvher 6y ago
  Got it - I thought that was yesterday and was confused but it’s probably a time zone thing (am in Europe). Still isn’t that separate from 230? Going by the article this law does not seem to be as much about moderation as it is about accountability. I do share your sentiment that there is too much control by a few powerful players over what is and isn’t acceptable discourse.
- TameAntelope 6y ago
  What part of being banned from Twitter prevents someone from being heard? Also, who is getting banned for talking about the politicians? #2, #7, and #8 (obliquely) on trending right now are about the main politician who was banned...
  - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
    I don't care about Trump getting banned from twitter. I care about the coordinated takedown of parler by google, apple and soon amazon. Section 230 is supposed to protect free speech on the internet by shielding platforms of legal liability for user generated content. But if a few tech monopolies can just kick a platform off the internet because they don't like its user generated content then what the hell is the point? Section 230 is only useful if you still have a platform to a protect.
    - thewindowmovie5 6y ago
      The demand from Apple was that Parler start moderation of the content which was trying to plan an armed version of what hand in Capitol on Jan 19th. Which, after seeing what happened recently, seems like a fair demand. I continue to see plenty of right and left leaning views in YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
    - grumple 6y ago
      Why should these companies be forced to provide access to a platform that’s largely used for coordinating insurrection and fomenting hate?
      - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
        Its not.
        grumple 6y ago
        Every source I’ve seen disagrees with you.

NE2z2T9qi 6y ago

Today we had 4 tech billionaires/CEOs telling us what politicians we’re allowed to hear from or talk about. That’s not OK.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> Today we had 4 tech billionaires/CEOs telling us what politicians we’re allowed to hear from or talk about. Nope, they are telling you who is allowed on their platform. You can hear from or talk about whoever you want.
- NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
  Let me guess, you’re the type of person who will complain incessantly about the Koch brothers and money in politics and super PACs... and yet here you are gleeful about giving tech oligarchs the effective power to choose the next President.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > Let me guess, you’re the type of person who will complain incessantly about the Koch brothers and money in politics and super PACs... Well, no, not the way you mean. That is, I think all those things are corrosive within the structure of the present US political system; OTOH, I also think that the ways people propose to constrain them tend to both have side effects as bad or worse than the problems they solve, and violate the First Amendment. > and yet here you are gleeful about giving tech oligarchs the effective power to choose the next President. I disagree that that is the result, and I'm not at all gleeful.
samvher 6y ago
Got it - I thought that was yesterday and was confused but it’s probably a time zone thing (am in Europe). Still isn’t that separate from 230? Going by the article this law does not seem to be as much about moderation as it is about accountability. I do share your sentiment that there is too much control by a few powerful players over what is and isn’t acceptable discourse.
TameAntelope 6y ago
What part of being banned from Twitter prevents someone from being heard? Also, who is getting banned for talking about the politicians? #2, #7, and #8 (obliquely) on trending right now are about the main politician who was banned...
- Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
  I don't care about Trump getting banned from twitter. I care about the coordinated takedown of parler by google, apple and soon amazon. Section 230 is supposed to protect free speech on the internet by shielding platforms of legal liability for user generated content. But if a few tech monopolies can just kick a platform off the internet because they don't like its user generated content then what the hell is the point? Section 230 is only useful if you still have a platform to a protect.
  - thewindowmovie5 6y ago
    The demand from Apple was that Parler start moderation of the content which was trying to plan an armed version of what hand in Capitol on Jan 19th. Which, after seeing what happened recently, seems like a fair demand. I continue to see plenty of right and left leaning views in YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.
  - grumple 6y ago
    Why should these companies be forced to provide access to a platform that’s largely used for coordinating insurrection and fomenting hate?
    - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
      Its not.
      - grumple 6y ago
        Every source I’ve seen disagrees with you.