4 ms·

> They are demanding to be reinstated immediately. LOL. You were using someone else's website - Zuck's, to be specific. If you demand that he allows you to pos

by pmlnr 6y ago

> They are demanding to be reinstated immediately. LOL. You were using someone else's website - Zuck's, to be specific. If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? I'm actually glad these are finally happening. People need to learn to go back running their own services, under their own domain, owned (bought or leased) hardware, etc. The current "social" media + cloud everything is a bad road, but apparently this - the shutdowns - is the only way to get out of this swamp.

polar 6y ago
> If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? Well put.
mrzimmerman 6y ago
Agreed except for the cloud part. Buying your own hardware, configuring and maintaining it is a high bar for most people, even technical people. But we do need distributes systems and we need a lot of competition in the hosting space (it’s not terrible now for lost things if they’re small but big services may have problems).
imgabe 6y ago
> If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? Facebook is the Internet equivalent of a public accommodation[1]. It is not Zuckerberg's personal home, it is a place open to the public to conduct business. If Facebook is going to set conditions that some members of the public are allowed and not others, it should be clear what those conditions are and when they are and are not met. That said, I do agree that people should flee these places where they're at the mercy of whatever algorithm or ideological fad that takes over the current employees or whatever. But insofar as they aren't we should regulate it the same way we regulate (in the US) hotels, restaurants, and other public-facing businesses to ensure that the whole public has a fair chance to use them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_accommodations_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_accommodations_in_the_U...
garbagetime 6y ago
>If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? Of course you could. Whether you would have a good case is another question. If you're implying an equivalence between the two situations I think what you're missing is that Facebook and the SWP's websites are very different kinds of website. Facebook is a social media website[1] that hosts various kinds of communities, whereas the SWP's website is a website specific to the SWP. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking_service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking_service
- pmlnr 6y ago
  > different kinds of website Are there any laws that differentiate between "public" and "private" websites?
  - garbagetime 6y ago
    No idea. When I said "Whether you would have a good case is another question" I wasn't talking about a legal argument - I was just talking about whether or not you'd be able to make a compelling argument likely to affect actual change.

by pmlnr 6y ago

polar 6y ago

> If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? Well put.

mrzimmerman 6y ago

Agreed except for the cloud part. Buying your own hardware, configuring and maintaining it is a high bar for most people, even technical people. But we do need distributes systems and we need a lot of competition in the hosting space (it’s not terrible now for lost things if they’re small but big services may have problems).

imgabe 6y ago

> If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? Facebook is the Internet equivalent of a public accommodation[1]. It is not Zuckerberg's personal home, it is a place open to the public to conduct business. If Facebook is going to set conditions that some members of the public are allowed and not others, it should be clear what those conditions are and when they are and are not met. That said, I do agree that people should flee these places where they're at the mercy of whatever algorithm or ideological fad that takes over the current employees or whatever. But insofar as they aren't we should regulate it the same way we regulate (in the US) hotels, restaurants, and other public-facing businesses to ensure that the whole public has a fair chance to use them. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_accommodations_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_accommodations_in_the_U...

garbagetime 6y ago

>If you demand that he allows you to post on his site, could I make demands to post on your site? Of course you could. Whether you would have a good case is another question. If you're implying an equivalence between the two situations I think what you're missing is that Facebook and the SWP's websites are very different kinds of website. Facebook is a social media website[1] that hosts various kinds of communities, whereas the SWP's website is a website specific to the SWP. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking_service https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_networking_service

pmlnr 6y ago
> different kinds of website Are there any laws that differentiate between "public" and "private" websites?
- garbagetime 6y ago
  No idea. When I said "Whether you would have a good case is another question" I wasn't talking about a legal argument - I was just talking about whether or not you'd be able to make a compelling argument likely to affect actual change.