3 ms·
Definitely the world wouldn’t be better without all ads, because that would be a clear violation of free speech. However ads should be limited only to communic
by tirant 9mo ago
Definitely the world wouldn’t be better without all ads, because that would be a clear violation of free speech.
However ads should be limited only to communication channels that are optional to engage in. As for example, an ad on YouTube, a private video platform, should be perfectly fine. That’s part of the product. On the other hand, ads on a highway, on the street, should not be allowed. I have not given permission for them to enter my personal mental space. I’m fine with shops advertising their presence, but not full fledged advertising on roads, streets, etc.
- moffkalast 9mo agoIf free speech is you rolling up with a megaphone to yell promotional nonsense at me, then it's my free speech to vote for you to get banned I think.
- tirant 9mo agoThat’s exactly my point. Free speech but only when the receiver has agreed to participate in that medium. You guys did not read past the first sentence?
- elevatortrim 9mo agoFree speech does not mean you get to yell at me. In the same way, banning ads where they are shown to users without their consent would not mean violation of free speech.
- tcfhgj 9mo agoads aren't free speech, but corrupted speech