The Big Tech March to Silence Free Speech

#702
#702
McDad said:
Tulsi seems like a gem compared to other politicians. If what she is asserting is accurate, then tech platforms are become much more like news platforms (she mentioned NYTs) and less like a neutral host of content. It means the tech platforms should be held to the same standards as news publishers.
Click to expand...
Oh you’ve done it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#704
#704
utvols88 said:
Disagree. They have a choice. If they want to moderate, they are liable like NYT. If they want the benefits of section 230, don't moderate. It's not infringing on freedom at all.

I would place hosting and server services as utilities at the very least. What Amazon did to Parler is outrageous.
Click to expand...

Why? The NYT is not a moderator. It's a publisher. Moderation is not publication. NYT and FB are completely different types of businesses/media outlets. NYT should be responsible for what they publish in their newspaper. FB should not be responsible for what other people publish on their platform.

If the law change effectively forces FB to host content that they don't want to host, then it's an infringement on freedom.
 
#705
#705
utvols88 said:
I think it's Sweden but one of the EU countries only allows the moderation of illegal activity. I think this provision fixes your problem.
Click to expand...

Well, we live in America and everything is illegal here, including vague things like "public lewdness".

Inciting a riot is illegal and what it entails is completely subjective. FB can just say Trump is banned for that illegal behavior. What now?

Big government doesn't work, bro. Let the market sort this out. It won't be perfect, but it won't be ridiculous either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#706
#706
n_huffhines said:
Why? The NYT is not a moderator. It's a publisher. Moderation is not publication. NYT and FB are completely different types of businesses/media outlets. NYT should be responsible for what they publish in their newspaper. FB should not be responsible for what other people publish on their platform.

If the law change effectively forces FB to host content that they don't want to host, then it's an infringement on freedom.
Click to expand...

That only upsets them when it's their businesses that has to make the gay cakes or offer birth control to employees. Then its tyranny.
 
#707
#707
n_huffhines said:
Why? The NYT is not a moderator. It's a publisher. Moderation is not publication. NYT and FB are completely different types of businesses/media outlets. NYT should be responsible for what they publish in their newspaper. FB should not be responsible for what other people publish on their platform.

If the law change effectively forces FB to host content that they don't want to host, then it's an infringement on freedom.
Click to expand...
They are choosing to editorialize their product. When algorithms lean toward certain topics that aren't transparent, when users are removed for not specifically violating a good faith policy, such as the banning of live murder videos or any illegal action. The law doesn't force FB to host anything. If they want to be exempt from liability in the same manner Bellsouth is, they have to be neutral. They are free to moderate but they'll have liability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#708
#708
n_huffhines said:
Well, we live in America and everything is illegal here, including vague things like "public lewdness".

Inciting a riot is illegal and what it entails is completely subjective. FB can just say Trump is banned for that illegal behavior. What now?

Big government doesn't work, bro. Let the market sort this out. It won't be perfect, but it won't be ridiculous either.
Click to expand...
I don't want big gov. I'd rather have the free market decide but the market isnt allowing competition like Parler to decide what people prefer in their social media platforms.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Ttucke11
#709
#709
utvols88 said:
They are choosing to editorialize their product. When algorithms lean toward certain topics that aren't transparent, when users are removed for not specifically violating a good faith policy, such as the banning of live murder videos or any illegal action. The law doesn't force FB to host anything. If they want to be exempt from liability in the same manner Bellsouth is, they have to be neutral. They are free to moderate but they'll have liability.
Click to expand...

Complete neutrality doesn't work. These sites all become backpage if there is no moderation. Or if we allow moderation, then it's a constant fight about what is neutral (and the government decides....good luck with that). It's not a solution.
 
#710
#710
Septic said:
That only upsets them when it's their businesses that has to make the gay cakes or offer birth control to employees. Then its tyranny.
Click to expand...

More stupidity. Like you have an endless supply.

The gay couple can still shop at the bakery. Please try and stop trying to pass this ignorance on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Ttucke11
#711
#711
n_huffhines said:
Complete neutrality doesn't work. These sites all become backpage if there is no moderation. Or if we allow moderation, then it's a constant fight about what is neutral (and the government decides....good luck with that). It's not a solution.
Click to expand...
The one thing I want to be considered a utility is web hosting. I am far more worried about the implications of Amazon's decision than Twitter or Facebook.

I think Twitter and Facebook have overstepped and deserve to have to fight for section 230 benefits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Ttucke11
#713
#713
Vol8188 said:
I’m going to question if you watched the video. I was a man who was unbelievably. His own peers (the people in the car with him) were making signs (finger circling the ear) to tell the police he had a few screws loose.

I then watched the police try over and over again to get the man into the police car. He refused multiple times saying he was claustrophobic (despite having been in a smaller car previously).

I agree the knee on the neck wasn’t necessary. But I think you’re misrepresenting what happened. Choked to death in broad daylight is not what happened.
Click to expand...

So, in sum, you disagree with two independent coroner reports, plus the video that shows the cop's knee on his neck, plus the video where George Floyd says, "I can't breathe".

Got it.

So if murder didn't happen in your opinion, what did?
 
#715
#715
utvols88 said:
The one thing I want to be considered a utility is web hosting. I am far more worried about the implications of Amazon's decision than Twitter or Facebook.

I think Twitter and Facebook have overstepped and deserve to have to fight for section 230 benefits.
Click to expand...

I think we need to get past this 230 thing and call this what it truly is.

Antitrust.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, SpaceCoastVol, Kristy* and 2 others
#718
#718
allvol123 said:
More stupidity. Like you have an endless supply.

The gay couple can still shop at the bakery. Please try and stop trying to pass this ignorance on.
Click to expand...

*sigh* More conflation surrounding screeches of "tyranny."

Also, starting every conversation with insults is really more telling about your insecurities than my intelligence. I get it though, that's who you are and based on the last four, tough interweb talk is clearly very impressive to you and your ilk.
 
#721
#721
Septic said:
*sigh* More conflation surrounding screeches of "tyranny."

Also, starting every conversation with insults is really more telling about your insecurities than my intelligence. I get it though, that's who you are and based on the last four, tough interweb talk is clearly very impressive to you and your ilk.
Click to expand...

I think you are stupid, that isnt tough internet talk. It is an assessment based on dumb posts like the one regarding an all out assault by colluding billionaire tech as comparable to a bakery not wanting to bake a cake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, Ttucke11 and Caculator
#722
#722
utvols88 said:
The one thing I want to be considered a utility is web hosting. I am far more worried about the implications of Amazon's decision than Twitter or Facebook.

I think Twitter and Facebook have overstepped and deserve to have to fight for section 230 benefits.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a utility that people don't need for basic comfort or pay for. Makes as little sense as treating them like a publisher.

Maybe platforms are their own new kind of thing and we should stop trying to regulate it with old ideas that work with qualitatively different business models.

No matter what solution you ask for, it's always going to boil down to the government deciding things. I assume you trust about 10% of Republicans and 0% of Democrats. I'm more like 2% and 1%. Good luck with fixing the internet, man.
 
#723
#723
Septic said:
That only upsets them when it's their businesses that has to make the gay cakes or offer birth control to employees. Then its tyranny.
Click to expand...

Why should an employer provide birth control? The business agreed to make a cake they just refused to make one that violated their “terms of service”. They would’ve made a cake and said “here put whatever you want in it” but that wasn’t good enough. People for the most part aren’t against moderation as long as it’s equally applied by unbiased moderators or at least ones that can pretend to be. If someone is threatening to kill someone on any platform we can all agree action should be taken. If someone is saying we should protest something we don’t agree with is where we run into issues because apparently it depends on who’s saying it now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ttucke11, Kristy* and allvol123
#724
#724
allvol123 said:
I think you are stupid, that isnt tough internet talk. It is an assessment based on dumb posts like the one regarding an all out assault by colluding billionaire tech as comparable to a bakery not wanting to bake a cake.
Click to expand...

I shouldn't be surprised that you're unable to connect the dots on your ilks inability to reconcile gay cake tyranny and "big tech" not wanting their platforms used to coordinate violence among its users, but this was an easy one.

Like I said, your ad hom's are a manifestation of your insecurities and you keep telling on yourself.
 
#725
#725
n_huffhines said:
Yeah, a utility that people don't need for basic comfort or pay for. Makes as little sense as treating them like a publisher.

Maybe platforms are their own new kind of thing and we should stop trying to regulate it with old ideas that work with qualitatively different business models.

No matter what solution you ask for, it's always going to boil down to the government deciding things. I assume you trust about 10% of Republicans and 0% of Democrats. I'm more like 2% and 1%. Good luck with fixing the internet, man.
Click to expand...
Bellsouth, Comcast, AT&T have aspects of their business that are given the utility protection such as internet service, phone lines, cell phones, etc. They "host" the access so when Huff calls his buddy to rob a bank, they aren't held liable. They don't dictate what you talk about via text, phone or messages. Web hosting is the same in present technology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and Kristy*
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top