2 ms·

You present a silly position. Sure it is a private company but artificially stacking the deck against competition, either business or speech, violates the core

You present a silly position. Sure it is a private company but artificially stacking the deck against competition, either business or speech, violates the core promise of a free market democracy: that the best wins. Competition makes the best products for the lowest prices, free discourse allows the most sound ideas to rise to the top. Secretly screwing with what should be a level playing-field is dishonest and demonstrates a weakness in your products and/or ideas. Dishonesty has no place in business or public discourse. And in this case is anticompetitive which makes it illegal. Now that it has come to light you’ll see him scrambling to undo it because it doesn’t stand up to public scrutiny.

eightysixfour 3y ago
> Sure it is a private company but artificially stacking the deck against competition, either business or speech, violates the core promise of a free market democracy: that the best wins. But Twitter isn’t a free market nor a democracy. It’s a private media company. Private media companies stack the deck every day, it is THEIR deck. Don’t want a stacked deck? Don’t play their game. The only place you are (supposed to be) guaranteed a free market and democracy is from the government and with public goods. I’ve had this argument before here on HN. My end stance is that connections to the internet need to have connectivity guarantees for legal services (and they’re regulated and heavily publicly funded, so I think this is reasonable) so that people can create competitive services. However cloud providers, private platforms, etc. don’t owe you anything beyond their own T&Cs, which they can obviously change. Also, open invite to email me at the address in my profile. I have a virtual Sunday morning coffee group that loves to argue over stuff like this and you’re welcome to join and we can talk it out.

eightysixfour 3y ago

> Sure it is a private company but artificially stacking the deck against competition, either business or speech, violates the core promise of a free market democracy: that the best wins. But Twitter isn’t a free market nor a democracy. It’s a private media company. Private media companies stack the deck every day, it is THEIR deck. Don’t want a stacked deck? Don’t play their game. The only place you are (supposed to be) guaranteed a free market and democracy is from the government and with public goods. I’ve had this argument before here on HN. My end stance is that connections to the internet need to have connectivity guarantees for legal services (and they’re regulated and heavily publicly funded, so I think this is reasonable) so that people can create competitive services. However cloud providers, private platforms, etc. don’t owe you anything beyond their own T&Cs, which they can obviously change. Also, open invite to email me at the address in my profile. I have a virtual Sunday morning coffee group that loves to argue over stuff like this and you’re welcome to join and we can talk it out.