2 ms·
>Okay, so this is going to be super controversial to some people, but I firmly believe that we are basically trying to bypass the law (at the very least in spir
by ramesh31 5y ago
>Okay, so this is going to be super controversial to some people, but I firmly believe that we are basically trying to bypass the law (at the very least in spirit) when we agree for the big companies to limit free speech in that way.
Use IRC. Use free forum software. Write a blog. Go stand on a soapbox in Times Square and shout it at the top of your lungs. Do whatever you want. But free speech has precisely nothing to do with having free reign to violate a company's terms of service. You have the constitutional right to say whatever you want. You do not have the constitutional right to have your nonsense amplified by billions of dollars worth of privately owned technical infrastructure.
- throwawaysea 5y agoWhat happens when the public mostly occupies spaces/services that are owned or outsourced to private corporations? Do you agree that the spirit of the law would be violated by their imposition of censorship? Or that shouting on a soapbox is roughly the same as doing nothing at all when almost all the important parts of our democratic process that precede voting are taking place on platforms owned by large tech companies?
- anoonmoose 5y agoIf you're asking what happens when public spaces are mostly owned by private corporations, I'd suggest you need to be a bit more clear on what you consider a public space.