3 ms·

Just a note — there is basically zero chance that Jeff Bezos would face any sort of governmental action if he "pissed off a guy in a government department," how

Just a note — there is basically zero chance that Jeff Bezos would face any sort of governmental action if he "pissed off a guy in a government department," however influential that person may be. AWS just blocked Parler, and I'm sure our current president — arguably the most powerful man on Earth (until tomorrow) — was not very happy with that. We don't see Jeff Bezos in hiding for doing that, nor would he have to go into hiding for anything far less. I don't say this to accuse you (@dang trying not to flamewar) — do you not see that this argument is a little disingenuous? If you don't, I'd love to hear your thinking on why.

FooBarWidget 6y ago
Well, I'd just have to respectfully disagree then. As someone who runs my own company, I know better than to pick a quarrel with my customers, even if I don't agree with those customers on a political or whatever level. It's not at all strange to have multiple factions in an organizations who are after multiple vendors, as tool for an internal power war. Maybe if I piss off the guy who chose me as vendor, then his rivals will use that fact against him. My point is, social relations are complex. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence.
- jolux 6y ago
  >My point is, social relations are complex. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. In general it does mean freedom from legal consequences and government interference, with few exceptions.
  - FooBarWidget 6y ago
    Is that really good enough? Why is freedom from government interference all you care about?
    - jolux 6y ago
      It's not all that I care about, but the government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. I have recourse to that force if another private entity harms me. Who do I have recourse to if the government harms me? I consider freedom of speech a baseline, and I think it's one of the only things the US Constitution got right.

FooBarWidget 6y ago

Well, I'd just have to respectfully disagree then. As someone who runs my own company, I know better than to pick a quarrel with my customers, even if I don't agree with those customers on a political or whatever level. It's not at all strange to have multiple factions in an organizations who are after multiple vendors, as tool for an internal power war. Maybe if I piss off the guy who chose me as vendor, then his rivals will use that fact against him. My point is, social relations are complex. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence.

jolux 6y ago
>My point is, social relations are complex. Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. In general it does mean freedom from legal consequences and government interference, with few exceptions.
- FooBarWidget 6y ago
  Is that really good enough? Why is freedom from government interference all you care about?
  - jolux 6y ago
    It's not all that I care about, but the government has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. I have recourse to that force if another private entity harms me. Who do I have recourse to if the government harms me? I consider freedom of speech a baseline, and I think it's one of the only things the US Constitution got right.