3 ms·
What's interesting to me about this article isn't which politician said what, or even TikTok. It's the complete lack of discussion around the huge authoritarian
by jehb 4y ago
What's interesting to me about this article isn't which politician said what, or even TikTok. It's the complete lack of discussion around the huge authoritarian overreach it would be to give any executive of any political party the power to unilaterally "ban" a specific website / platform.
- brucethemoose2 4y agoDo they already do this under narrow circumstances, like terrorism or espionage cases? What about DMCA? Though I think no one here on HN is happy about the state of DMCA... But yeah, it seems like this wouldn't hold up in the Supreme Court.
- ofalkaed 4y agoWe are starting up with election season politics. Controversial legislation that will never stand up in court always starts popping up around this time, it provides a way for party members to safely move away from party line; people whose position is safe or will not be seeking reelection start going further to their side so those who are not as safe in their position can move (or appear to move) more to the other side and get some of those voters in the middle. We also start seeing odd things like the FBI making statements by irregular means, circumventing the traditional channels. Edit: Part of this is likely just getting all those people who ignore politics most of the year to start paying attention.
- maxerickson 4y ago"undercut core American values of free speech and free enterprise" ??? Seems to be getting at your complaint quite directly.