nobody_at_all

4 ms·

1.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Facebook is just an endpoint on the internet. Nothing more. AT&T is an ISP among other carrier things. How can a server, or a set of servers be anything more than an endpoint? That you would compare ATT and FB shows a remarkable misunde
2.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
I rarely use services anyway because it is typically a bad idea to get so intertwined with software that I can't control.
3.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
It is irrelevant. A private business is a private business and they can set their rules as they please as long as it doesn't run afoul of laws (ADA in the states for example). That you think there is some important distinction where Go
4.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Show me where you have a right to access a popular server that is not owned by you. Show me where you have the right to have a conversation. That means that others can be compelled to talk to you.
5.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
That is not even close to true. They stop you from using their services, that is it. You have no right to access popular private servers. You have no right to a conversation because everyone else has the right to ignore you if they so choos
6.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
You would end up criminally charged with disseminating CP, violating copyright and more within a month. It is easy to be an internet tough guy, how about you actually start a simple file server with no restrictions and see how it goes?
7.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
On my property, I have the final say on what is and is not allowed. Why should a company not have the same right on their property? Stores do. Go to a store and cause a ruckus and watch the ban hammer come down on you after the cops drag yo
8.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Oddly enough, there is not a strong business case in allowing the dregs of society to post their garbage all over your servers. If Twitter adopted 4chan policies, it would be destroyed financially in short order. Twitter is pretty loose com
9.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Again, Google is not stopping you from using your speech. If they ban you, they are telling you that they don't want you on their private property. They don't take away your internet connection. When did society need Google, or Tw
10.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Corporations only make that distinction on their property. These big tech companies do not have the power to silence anyone. Just like you can ban people you don't like from yours.
11.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
That is a problem except that no one gets booted for being conservative, so it is not really a problem. The top performers on FB are conservative pages for crying out loud! They are afraid of much, which is the problem. It is irrational fea
12.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
If a company doesn't know exactly why and where their competitors are better then them, they are not long for this world.
13.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Why do I care if some service uses them? I severely restrict service usage anyway.
14.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
How can an endpoint, no matter how large that endpoint is, be considered to be a common carrier? Justice Thomas is hardly a reliable source for making it so.
15.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
What do you lose by not being able to post or upload files on a Google-owned server? People act like being banned is a life threatening event.
16.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
I don't do business with either Google or Apple. I don't need them to do anything at all. There are competitors to Visa. I can do anything I want without Apple, Visa, Google and even Amazon and Microsoft.
17.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
You start with a faulty premise: google services are public, so you have no valid point. Build your own data center and upload anything you want. Don't demand that a private company give you an unfettered soapbox. Also "source a n
18.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
There is a difference between opposing viewpoints and factually incorrect information that is destructive. If your view is based on provable falsehoods, your view is worse than valueless. Tolerating these people is harmful to everyone, but
19.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
Google has property rights. They don't want BS that is harming everyone on their property. I would ban the same on my property. That said, there is no reason to ever use Google. Nothing they offer is so critical that you must use them.
20.
by nobody_at_all 5y ago
> Obviously, if I work as a developer making a stock trading app, I shouldn't be making a competing stock trading app after hours. How is that obvious? If a single person, regardless of where they work, can produce a stock trading a