3 ms·
Oh okay, if they only ban a subset which you agree with it's not state controlled apps. Got it, very logical. Other logical conclusions: Banning LGBT apps !=
by mrtksn 4y ago
Oh okay, if they only ban a subset which you agree with it's not state controlled apps. Got it, very logical.
Other logical conclusions:
Banning LGBT apps != allowing only state controlled apps.
Banning pro-Trump apps != allowing only state controlled apps.
Banning abortion clinic apps != allowing only state controlled apps.
Banning gun related apps != allowing only state controlled apps.
Banning climate activist apps != allowing only state controlled apps.
Banning Fox news apps != allowing only state controlled apps.
How do you people even rationalise this in your head?
- kelseyfrog 4y agoYou have to realize the difference between state controlled and state approved. Maybe you don't think there is a difference? We don't have a "Let's kill the president app" because it is illegal. It's not approved to exist. Does that mean all the apps we have left are state controlled apps?
- mrtksn 4y agoI'm all in for banning illegal apps. What's illegal about TikTok? What I say is that define what is illegal and what are the requirements to legally operate a service to address your concerns. That's regulation and means open and free market with safety. Believing that an App can be misused by your adversaries or its against your interests and banning it is not free market. That's Chinese way of governing. Don't be China, Chinese government is not good.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoWhat's illegal about anything? If you think there's some sort of legal essentialism in objects and actions, then we're coming at this from very different places. Natural law theory is, how to put this, naive. Legal realism too, while we're at it, in the sense that legal scientism is equally hallucinogenic.