Doesn't it feel like the fact that it is debatable and not at all clear-cut mean that we should err on the side of free speech. And if we imagined the governme

Doesn't it feel like the fact that it is debatable and not at all clear-cut mean that we should err on the side of free speech. And if we imagined the government doing such a thing and taking it to the Supreme Court, can you really imagine them coming to the conclusion that it was incitement to violence - having them consider all the legal precedent also. Companies can do what they like. People can say what they like. Is it good for society. I don't think so. And does the tech world stand for free speech - it can no longer be said. But students of history will clearly see the precedent that is developing although we are certainly breaking new ground.