2 ms·
You have missed the point. There should be no urge inside you to remove opinions if you were mentally mature. You would just disagree, ignore or maybe even argu
by raxxorrax 5y ago
You have missed the point. There should be no urge inside you to remove opinions if you were mentally mature. You would just disagree, ignore or maybe even argue against it.
People that demand social media companies not arbitrarily censor content is not a legal argument. And most social media company actually agree on that, they fear litigation and/or the wrath of less mature people or they want to err on the side of caution because people that tend to like burning books still exist.
- bediger4000 5y ago> You would just disagree, ignore or maybe even argue against it. This doesn't square with lived experience. Postal mail, faxing, usenet, regular phone calls and email are all pretty much useless because we didn't crack down on spamming. Censorship works, at least to keep platforms from being rendered useless by advertising, porn, and propaganda. Also, the author really does seem to want someone other than the speaker to pay for the free speech. Merely gainsaying my argument doesn't make it go away.
- raxxorrax 5y agoI believe it disingenious to insist that removal of opinions and removal of spam have the same motivation.
- bediger4000 5y agoEvon Latrail agrees.