50 ms·

What makes it like a government? You didn't offer any explanations except that they control speech, however they only control speech on their service and there

What makes it like a government? You didn't offer any explanations except that they control speech, however they only control speech on their service and there are alternative services unlike the government

Dah00n 4y ago
Lots of government services post on Facebook - often only on Facebook. You can't comment on that or read it elsewhere. There are no alternatives unless the poster picks it for you.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Alternative to what? Protest? Why does it have to be the Facebook post?
- parminya 4y ago
  That doesn't make Facebook like a government though. If twenty years ago the government chose to advertise a job in the three largest newspapers in a city, and not in the Dah00n Times, that doesn't make the newspapers like a government or incorporate them into the government. It might mean that people should question whether the government is too closely tied to certain private corporations. But that's a different question.
largepeepee 4y ago
Just having one service ban you will screw up your life, such is the case of one programmer who uploaded a picture of his toddler to let the doctor check for infection - and got permanently banned by the AI, losing access to his Gmail and other Google tools registered to him. And services rarely act alone, when they do decide to target someone, they usually act in unison to deplatform, whether justified or not. In some ways big tech is far more powerful than governments.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- parminya 4y ago
  This is a case for regulation* and for promoting competition and diversity in the marketplace. It's not a case for treating them as governments. If they're governments, who chooses their leadership? Do they have one board, selected by the US president/according to the rules of the US Congress, that is applicable in the US, and another board, selected by the Canadian PM/according to the rules of Canadian law, that is applicable in Canada? How much are we going to pay to their shareholders for confiscating their property? * Banning moderation is a form of regulation. It falls far short of treating them as governments. It is possible to say "I want to regulate Twitter" without having to make weird statements like "We should treat Twitter as a government".
  - welshwelsh 4y ago
    Nobody said that they are national governments. They are organizations with governance policies. Even if corporations are not governments, they are far more similar to governments then they are to private individuals. Moderation is a form of regulation- it is a way of regulating speech. Banning moderation is deregulation. "More platforms" is not the answer. In a democracy, when people are publicly discussing matters of public or political importance, other citizens have the right to participate in that conversation.
    - joshuamorton 4y ago
      > Nobody said that they are national governments. They are organizations with governance policies. Under this definition, practically any organization "is a government". My college debate team, Tesla, your local Starbucks. All "governments", because they are organizations have a governance policy (which really just means "leadership"). > Banning moderation is deregulation. No. The government controlling how corporations can act is, definitionally, regulation. You can argue that is good regulation, but it is regulation. If I am allowed to censor you, that is less regulation than if I am legally prevented from censoring you.

Dah00n 4y ago

Lots of government services post on Facebook - often only on Facebook. You can't comment on that or read it elsewhere. There are no alternatives unless the poster picks it for you.

themitigating 4y ago
Alternative to what? Protest? Why does it have to be the Facebook post?
parminya 4y ago
That doesn't make Facebook like a government though. If twenty years ago the government chose to advertise a job in the three largest newspapers in a city, and not in the Dah00n Times, that doesn't make the newspapers like a government or incorporate them into the government. It might mean that people should question whether the government is too closely tied to certain private corporations. But that's a different question.

largepeepee 4y ago

Just having one service ban you will screw up your life, such is the case of one programmer who uploaded a picture of his toddler to let the doctor check for infection - and got permanently banned by the AI, losing access to his Gmail and other Google tools registered to him. And services rarely act alone, when they do decide to target someone, they usually act in unison to deplatform, whether justified or not. In some ways big tech is far more powerful than governments.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
parminya 4y ago
This is a case for regulation* and for promoting competition and diversity in the marketplace. It's not a case for treating them as governments. If they're governments, who chooses their leadership? Do they have one board, selected by the US president/according to the rules of the US Congress, that is applicable in the US, and another board, selected by the Canadian PM/according to the rules of Canadian law, that is applicable in Canada? How much are we going to pay to their shareholders for confiscating their property? * Banning moderation is a form of regulation. It falls far short of treating them as governments. It is possible to say "I want to regulate Twitter" without having to make weird statements like "We should treat Twitter as a government".
- welshwelsh 4y ago
  Nobody said that they are national governments. They are organizations with governance policies. Even if corporations are not governments, they are far more similar to governments then they are to private individuals. Moderation is a form of regulation- it is a way of regulating speech. Banning moderation is deregulation. "More platforms" is not the answer. In a democracy, when people are publicly discussing matters of public or political importance, other citizens have the right to participate in that conversation.
  - joshuamorton 4y ago
    > Nobody said that they are national governments. They are organizations with governance policies. Under this definition, practically any organization "is a government". My college debate team, Tesla, your local Starbucks. All "governments", because they are organizations have a governance policy (which really just means "leadership"). > Banning moderation is deregulation. No. The government controlling how corporations can act is, definitionally, regulation. You can argue that is good regulation, but it is regulation. If I am allowed to censor you, that is less regulation than if I am legally prevented from censoring you.