4 ms·
Here I thought it was going to be about binding arbitration, but it's just culture war stuff.
by Macha 3y ago
Here I thought it was going to be about binding arbitration, but it's just culture war stuff.
- blackeyeblitzar 3y agoI don’t think it’s fair to dismiss it using a label like “culture war”. This is an important topic to many people, because there is mass censorship of opinions and views that deviate from a window determined by employees of companies that operate these big technology platforms. That censorship has been normalized even though it heavily damages and skews politics. This document has details on numerous practices that are prevalent across the industry and not well understood by most - that alone is worth reading and considering, as it points at a need to regulate these platforms in order to protect our political process. The recommendations made on Page 10 are actually pretty mild for what it’s worth.
- unclebucknasty 3y ago>there is mass censorship of opinions and views that deviate from a window determined by employees of companies that operate these big technology platforms. More like deviate from reality. So tired of this feigned innocence and victimhood. "What did we do to deserve this? We just have different opinions." You mean like QAnon, Bill Gates is trying to kill us all with COVID vaccines and 5G, and Trump won? You can't have one side polluting the infospace with rank disinformation, propaganda and lies and expect a healthy society to come of it. So, what you call "censorship", others would call "platforms being responsible". You want to consume hysterical conspiracy theories? Cool. Go to InfoWars, et. al. But, you can't force every platform to host it and foist nonsense on society en masse. That would be the actual violation of rights.