4 ms·

Article is total BS. Author seems to think that private businesses should be forced to publish anything some crackpot submits. Sorry, on my own website, I'll on

Article is total BS. Author seems to think that private businesses should be forced to publish anything some crackpot submits. Sorry, on my own website, I'll only publish what I want to. Here in America, that's what we call freedom.

jleyank 5y ago
There is nothing more than a guarantee against govt action as the framers feared and suffered such action. People have paid the price for speaking (libel, slander, worse) and the right to speak isn’t absolute (fire in theatres, etc). Civility and social norms collapsed years back and blaming a web comic that states things accurately at best is disingenuous. Yes, you will not face govt action, but you have no right to be listened to, hosted or be immune to the consequences of what you say.
- car_analogy 5y ago
  > comic that states things accurately Not entirely accurately. It pulls a subtle sleight of hand in saying "It's just that the people listening think you're an asshole, and they're showing you the door." It's not actually the people listening showing you the door - it's the owners of the social media in question. But "the people", or small personal websites, are much more sympathetic than multinational behemoths like Facebook or Twitter, with ten to a hundred times more members than most countries have people. But it's not like such a massive difference in size causes a qualitative difference that might merit different treatment..
  - jleyank 5y ago
    Well, in my case I exited Facebook rather than trying to ban every annoyance being put in my feed. Facebook thought it neat to feed me crap, so I took my eyeballs elsewhere. So, I guess we’re both right as I showed Facebook the door after failing to recover my feed.
dtagames 5y ago
I only read the post to see what would incur such a comment. And perhaps its even worse than you say... There are no ideas in that "article" at all. It's a complaint list, and it's not even clear what the complaint is about. The only positive comparison is to the "moral" lives of rural Indians, Hondurans, and Somalians -- who are known to be some of the poorest people in the world and living under great suffering. This fact is not conveyed by the author but rather conveniently overlooked. Blame me for thinking correlation equals causation in this case, but the prima facie evidence is overwhelming that democratic societies which encourage a free market and free speech do have better standards of living for their citizens. Despotism and totalitarian rulemaking from above, including rules about speech, have proven again and again to lead to desperate poverty and economic ruin. Free speech and free business go together, hand-in-hand. I would not, for a second, want the US to become like China or Russia where the state decides which speech must (and, obviously, what must not) be carried by publishers, media, and artists. But freedom of speech goes both ways. In other words, every person and every business must also have the right to not speak if they choose not to, as illustrated in the XKCD comic. A newspaper or website is not compelled to address the latest lunatic cause or non-scientific theory, nor to give it coverage. The owners of that media, as free individuals, must choose which speech they want to hold up and convey and which they deny or ignore.
usrn 5y ago

jleyank 5y ago

There is nothing more than a guarantee against govt action as the framers feared and suffered such action. People have paid the price for speaking (libel, slander, worse) and the right to speak isn’t absolute (fire in theatres, etc). Civility and social norms collapsed years back and blaming a web comic that states things accurately at best is disingenuous. Yes, you will not face govt action, but you have no right to be listened to, hosted or be immune to the consequences of what you say.

car_analogy 5y ago
> comic that states things accurately Not entirely accurately. It pulls a subtle sleight of hand in saying "It's just that the people listening think you're an asshole, and they're showing you the door." It's not actually the people listening showing you the door - it's the owners of the social media in question. But "the people", or small personal websites, are much more sympathetic than multinational behemoths like Facebook or Twitter, with ten to a hundred times more members than most countries have people. But it's not like such a massive difference in size causes a qualitative difference that might merit different treatment..
- jleyank 5y ago
  Well, in my case I exited Facebook rather than trying to ban every annoyance being put in my feed. Facebook thought it neat to feed me crap, so I took my eyeballs elsewhere. So, I guess we’re both right as I showed Facebook the door after failing to recover my feed.

dtagames 5y ago

I only read the post to see what would incur such a comment. And perhaps its even worse than you say... There are no ideas in that "article" at all. It's a complaint list, and it's not even clear what the complaint is about. The only positive comparison is to the "moral" lives of rural Indians, Hondurans, and Somalians -- who are known to be some of the poorest people in the world and living under great suffering. This fact is not conveyed by the author but rather conveniently overlooked. Blame me for thinking correlation equals causation in this case, but the prima facie evidence is overwhelming that democratic societies which encourage a free market and free speech do have better standards of living for their citizens. Despotism and totalitarian rulemaking from above, including rules about speech, have proven again and again to lead to desperate poverty and economic ruin. Free speech and free business go together, hand-in-hand. I would not, for a second, want the US to become like China or Russia where the state decides which speech must (and, obviously, what must not) be carried by publishers, media, and artists. But freedom of speech goes both ways. In other words, every person and every business must also have the right to not speak if they choose not to, as illustrated in the XKCD comic. A newspaper or website is not compelled to address the latest lunatic cause or non-scientific theory, nor to give it coverage. The owners of that media, as free individuals, must choose which speech they want to hold up and convey and which they deny or ignore.

usrn 5y ago