I’m not obliged to tell you what my politics are — Brett

Can’t bring yourself to say it, can you? Just like Trump. Won’t be bullied into condemning violence. What a hero.

In any case, you don’t have to. I already know. You’re supporting domestic terrorists. I’m sure you don’t believe that— but that’s not relevant to me, nor anyone else here.

Yes, you have.

Yes, you have. — Xtrix

You keep saying that, so show me.

Not reading any more of Brett. — Baden

I’ll go back to ignoring him as well. It’s pretty easy. I couldn’t help myself given the disgrace on Wednesday and his response to it.

Won’t be bullied into condemning violence. — Xtrix

Was that a slip of the tongue? Bring out the rack and thumbscrews!

Deleted repeat

I’ll go back to ignoring him as well. It’s pretty easy. I couldn’t help myself given the disgrace on Wednesday and his response to it. — Xtrix

:up:

I’m not obliged to explain this to you.

This modern problem of giving every Tom, Dick, and Harry access to mass media via Twitter, Facebook and the like is something that must now be grappled with — Hanover

Yeah, but what exactly is the shape of that problem? I remember not too long ago people celebrating Twitter's role in fomenting revolutions in Middle East and North Africa (the term even has it's own wiki page: Twitter Revolutions), and anyone following say, Hong Kong, understands that social media has been indispensable for protest organization. I get that it's a cause de jour right now because of the toxicity of what's happened and has been happening (and what has happened, by the way? Effectively a non-event), but as soon as you zoom out, a change in circumstance will have us bemoaning just such limits. The guns are trained on the right right now - but they will not stay that way. In fact, this is a moment of exception, not the normal run of things - so-called left-wing social media accounts have for years been targets of erasure and deletion, and have been very much part of the current 'purge'.

The US is on the cusp of reinstituting a 'normalized' neoliberal regime deeply friendly with - if not entirely run by - silicon valley and wall street, and alot of people are going to need a great deal of alot more sedition.

I’m not obliged to explain this to you. — Xtrix

Explain what?

Don’t get the joke. Shocker.

Congratulations, Brett. You’ve once again proven too boring to even have a petty argument with. :yawn:

Just listening to a media lawyer, she says First Amendment rights pertain to the Government not suppressing freedom of expression. Twitter, AWS are businesses and can impose Terms of Service which are conditions of use for that service. Flout the terms, loose the right-to-use. Trump and the right are perfectly at liberty to create services with different terms. So it has nothing to do with censorship per se.

So, to summarise. I don’t have a sense of humour, I’m boring, I’m extreme right and I support terrorism.

Edit: this isn’t a philosophy forum, it’s an old ladies clarevoyent club.

The right is arguing that because they’re monopolies, there’s a different set of rules. They cite Iran and Syria leaders being allowed to say things freely, and a few posts about burning down a cop’s house that were supposedly left up— not sure if it was BLM or not. That’s the line they’re taking on Fox News, anyway.

Trump and the right are perfectly at liberty to create services with different terms. — Wayfarer

Except they're quite literally not, as the effective shut down of Parler shows quite distinctly.

Just to be clear - this is less a 'right' vs. 'left' problem than a corporate monopolists verses everyone else problem. The former is a cover for the latter.

Just condemn them. Go on. — Baden

He cannot because he is not worth the dust on the feet of those you have hanged!

I think I understand now why people move to the right. This has been quite enlightening.

Edit: to be more accurate, you move so far to the left that they’re now on the right.

Parler was shut down by another private service that they were using, though.

Push comes to shove, Trump can always (ask whoever runs his website to) host his own listserv and anyone who wants to subscribe to his newsletter can literally do that. Or they can put up a web forum, like this one. Or any of numerous other alternatives to using these big corporate-controlled platforms.

To be clear, I don’t like when online communities are controlled by a central party rather than letting end-users control moderation from their end-view alone, especially when that central control is heavy-handed. But nobody has to use those kinds of communities, so I largely just don’t. Anyone else who agrees with us about that is free to do likewise, and if enough people do likewise then there goes the network effect that attracts people to those services in the first place.

Educate. How is my question stupid?

These are tech companies, not publishers.

Free speech has never encompassed the right to say whatever you wish at my dinner table, nor does it include the right to speak with impunity.

But only because you do not believe in free speech. You have the right to say whatever you want at my dinner table, however, and to do so with impunity. Free speech, the principle and the desire for it, does not disappear with the fact of censorship.

The decentralization of information is undoubtedly a recent affair unlike anything we have seen before. I am of the mind that this is a good thing because it leads to more freedom to express oneself, and as a corollary, to seek and receive information.

I think it was Jaspers who made the point that free speech leads to the distortion of truth, but it also allows for its correction. Censorship leads to both the distortion of truth and its suppression.

I do get it, and I think it’s a valid and important point. I trust that the various boards and executives that made these calls agonised over them.

As for Parler - Amazon Web Services said, and I quoted the letter, they appeared to have no capacity to monitor and or delete posts calling for acts of violence. That was what got them banned. The largest problem is that there’s an explicit link between Donald Trump’s politics and violence, he’s been inciting violence since day one.

Here in Australia, Josh Frydenburg (a senior Liberal politician and minister of the Crown) was likewise arguing for freedom of expression. But what if there was a twitter channel dedicated to inciting people to go to Canberra and assassinate Australian federal politicians? What would he say then? Would that that protected under freedom of expression? There are Islamist ideologues in Australian jails this very day convicted for planning violence.

So - I see your point, and I think the argument always needs to be made, but in this case, I’m supporting those decisions, you’ve got a rogue politician who is literally tearing apart America. Desperate problems call for desperate remedies.

I think I understand now why people move to the right. — Brett

No flair for drama?

:lol:

No flair for drama? — praxis

Probably.

LOL, exactly. Poor little bitch wasn't even allowed to hang Mike Pence.

This is happening in Hong Kong, right now, as we speak:

The only thing I'm sad about is that they put this moronic lackey on a no-fly list but not a far more powerful enabler like Hawley or Cruz.

These private services have been pressured by governments to regulate speech. The Network Enforcement Act out of Germany is one such example. The EU puts much pressure on these companies, as the following article shows.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/03/technology/facebook-europe.html

In other words, state-enforced truth.

This war against such canards as “fake news”, “misinformation”, or in China’s case, “rumors”, has not only affected right-wingers, but also the left as well.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/11/26/intv-n26.html

This war against such canards as “fake news”, “misinformation — NOS4A2

This bullshit was peddled and popularized by the only person you come in here to run your fucking mouth in support of, so you can fuck right off, you piss-drinking hypocrite.

@NOS4A2 Oops you set him off.

Edit: see, you can say whatever you like if you’re innocent.