4 ms·

> What's the difference? Is Xiaomi not afforded the same control as Twitter? No. Of course not. How can you honestly believe, that a smartphone producer cont

> What's the difference? Is Xiaomi not afforded the same control as Twitter? No. Of course not. How can you honestly believe, that a smartphone producer controlling what you can access _on the internet_, is the same thing, as an online platform having a say in what happens on _their_ platform? That's completely absurd.

ng12 5y ago
I really don't understand how it's any different. If I sell you a phone why should I be obligated to allow you to do _anything_ on it? Not to mention there's already an extremely strong precedent for suppliers controlling what you are allowed do on your phone (see: iOS and the App Store). If you don't like it don't buy my phones. Again, I'm largely playing devil's advocate here. I'd much rather live in a world where we stop saying "but it's a private company" as a catch-all.
- anders_p 5y ago
  Again, I think you are being completely absurd. If you sell me a phone, and then deny me the right to use it as phone, then you are breaking the law. At least where I live. I would be able to demand a refund, and the Company could be penalized for lying about what they sell. You are being absurd. Also, private businesses should always be able to enforce their rules on their platform/property, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes like ethnicities, genders, sexualities, etc. Otherwise you could just shit on the floor of a restaurant, and they could do nothing about it. Again, you are being absurd.
  - piaste 5y ago
    > Also, private businesses should always be able to enforce their rules on their platform/property, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes like ethnicities, genders, sexualities, etc. > Otherwise you could just shit on the floor of a restaurant, and they could do nothing about it. While they both fall under the broad umbrella of 'ownership', I find it deeply misleading to equate Twitter, Inc.'s ownership of the URL twitter.com/XxxBloodNinjaXxx to your fellow citizen John Q. Smalltownrestauranteur's ownership of a floor that he personally cleans with a mop every evening. They are two form of ownership that have very little in common, and naïvely treating the owners as if they were equals and had the same power leads to poor policy.

ng12 5y ago

I really don't understand how it's any different. If I sell you a phone why should I be obligated to allow you to do _anything_ on it? Not to mention there's already an extremely strong precedent for suppliers controlling what you are allowed do on your phone (see: iOS and the App Store). If you don't like it don't buy my phones. Again, I'm largely playing devil's advocate here. I'd much rather live in a world where we stop saying "but it's a private company" as a catch-all.

anders_p 5y ago
Again, I think you are being completely absurd. If you sell me a phone, and then deny me the right to use it as phone, then you are breaking the law. At least where I live. I would be able to demand a refund, and the Company could be penalized for lying about what they sell. You are being absurd. Also, private businesses should always be able to enforce their rules on their platform/property, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes like ethnicities, genders, sexualities, etc. Otherwise you could just shit on the floor of a restaurant, and they could do nothing about it. Again, you are being absurd.
- piaste 5y ago
  > Also, private businesses should always be able to enforce their rules on their platform/property, as long as they don't discriminate against protected classes like ethnicities, genders, sexualities, etc. > Otherwise you could just shit on the floor of a restaurant, and they could do nothing about it. While they both fall under the broad umbrella of 'ownership', I find it deeply misleading to equate Twitter, Inc.'s ownership of the URL twitter.com/XxxBloodNinjaXxx to your fellow citizen John Q. Smalltownrestauranteur's ownership of a floor that he personally cleans with a mop every evening. They are two form of ownership that have very little in common, and naïvely treating the owners as if they were equals and had the same power leads to poor policy.