4 ms·

It doesnt sound hard to figure it out. Let's go with the president/senates of the most powerful country on the planet first. Ultimately, we should apply to ev

It doesnt sound hard to figure it out. Let's go with the president/senates of the most powerful country on the planet first. Ultimately, we should apply to every official leader of every country. But that can come later. Yes, we can get the court order (or whatever it is, I'm not familiar with the name) to forbid Trump from using Twitter. We do this all the time while performing investigation (e.g. forbidding a person to travel after making bail).

sokoloff 6y ago
The devil is in the details, as usual. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legalized-marijuana.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legali... (skip to "credit card buckets") When twitter was launched, would George W Bush have been granted a non-suspendable account on day 1? Should Biden get a non-suspendable Parler account on Jan 21? Would the members of the House of Representatives also be non-suspendable or is that for Senators only? California is larger than many countries by many measures. Should California's elected leaders have the same privileges as Italy's or the Netherlands'? "It doesn't sound hard to figure it out" hides a lot of complexity which needs to be dealt with. To me, it actually does sound fairly hard (or labor-intensive at a minimum) to figure it out to a level of detail required to pass a law.
- ergocoder 6y ago
  Perfect is the enemy of good. Let's just start with the most powerful person on the planet first, which POTUS, on the most popular social networks, which are FB and Twitter. We don't need to figure now what to do with, for example, a senate from Namibia. My position is that, if we are gonna ban an elected leader, let's get a judge to issue a court order. It's the same thing with search warrant or the arrest, and we can do that in a timely manner. The problem that I see is that nobody is pushing for having a proper process at all. Also, our tax law is like 100x more complex than this. So, yeah, it doesn't sound hard.

sokoloff 6y ago

The devil is in the details, as usual. http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legalized-marijuana.html http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2009/04/have-you-ever-legali... (skip to "credit card buckets") When twitter was launched, would George W Bush have been granted a non-suspendable account on day 1? Should Biden get a non-suspendable Parler account on Jan 21? Would the members of the House of Representatives also be non-suspendable or is that for Senators only? California is larger than many countries by many measures. Should California's elected leaders have the same privileges as Italy's or the Netherlands'? "It doesn't sound hard to figure it out" hides a lot of complexity which needs to be dealt with. To me, it actually does sound fairly hard (or labor-intensive at a minimum) to figure it out to a level of detail required to pass a law.

ergocoder 6y ago
Perfect is the enemy of good. Let's just start with the most powerful person on the planet first, which POTUS, on the most popular social networks, which are FB and Twitter. We don't need to figure now what to do with, for example, a senate from Namibia. My position is that, if we are gonna ban an elected leader, let's get a judge to issue a court order. It's the same thing with search warrant or the arrest, and we can do that in a timely manner. The problem that I see is that nobody is pushing for having a proper process at all. Also, our tax law is like 100x more complex than this. So, yeah, it doesn't sound hard.