Look who’s making a move here 
Gross. Of course the biggest corporations love to embrace more regulations, they’re the ones who would have the easiest time surviving all the legal hurdles.
1 Like
Besides, probably Facebook’s AI premoderation can regulate itself by now, so nobody would know 
4 Likes
Always found Richard Stallman an interesting individual. He is a character. I agree with some things he say’s but not everything. He is funny! I have my own opinions and i make my own judgements. I will listen if i want to and if i don’t i won’t. Doesn’t mean i agree or disagree. I have my own thoughts and i don’t have to try to convince anyone of any opinion i have. I can tell someone if they ask but i’m not going to argue about opinions. You’re free to think what you want and so is everyone else. But i am not free to push my opinion onto someone else to try to make them agree! So i don’t! This is not what people think is free speech. Just my opinion. Free is not really free as in Freedom! 
1 Like
The thing is quite simple: If you don’t think private companies should have the right to “censor” you, take this simple step:
Don’t agree to their terms and stop using them.
That’s it.
The fact that you most likely won’t find one who’s terms you AGREE with is your problem. Not theirs.
It is very telling that the “alternative to Twitter” that came around about 6 months ago that would “not ban people and protect free speech” took literally 24 hours before they started banning people. Just that they did it with peopel of the opposite political views than what Twitter usually bans people for.
Also, I do find it a bit telling that my first (admittedly provocative) post on this very thread got flagged, something nobody being against free speech would do, right? 
3 Likes
Free is not free as in Freedom. You are free to think what you want… free to say what you want if no one is objecting? 
2 Likes
If we’re speaking about big-tech & social networks like twitter, facebook, youtube etc…
It sounds kinda like: “If you don’t agree with CCP in China - just don’t support it.”
Well you certainly can try, you could even probably manage to stay alive, but they’ll still control your life and everyone around you
If let’s say 70% of users would come to such conclusion and would leave on principle - then it would be good idea, but otherwise it’s just poor long-term strategy 
There are no way around social network influence for humanity, unless it’s wild west free or everyone will wise-up at once, but both very unlikely…
Yeah that’s sad, some moderators seem to be opinionated on definition of “political” in rules i guess…
Especially with that guy who expressed standing with victims of violence in France and got banned. 
Well at least that forum is not deciding fate of humanity and still damn good as it’s primary goal which is Linux
1 Like
…I am being quite serious. If you don’t agree to their terms, don’t use them. Create your own social network.
If you find that hard to do, it is, again, your problem.
I do find it quite telling that most people who say “just shop somewhere else” when people argue against a store owner discriminating certain people very VERY often are also the people that yell at Twitter for banning them.
If you believe a private business should have the right to decide who to serve, then that person might be you.
2 Likes
You’re the only one here arguing for the right of corporations to discriminate against people.
This is hyperbolic. The influence of social media is nothing like the CCP has simply because the CCP can physically force their influence.
I don’t think that’s a fair statement. There have been many created in reaction to the current shitty ones and they will likely never get the same exposure and therefore the same cultural influence.
I mean…why shouldn’t they be able to? Seriously. It goes completely against the concept of freedom of association.
1 Like
I know i mentioned property previously
This has been an argument made in the context of Youtube, they currently are not treated as a platform but as some weird variant of a publisher thats treated as platform and publisher (its weird atm)
discrimination is not considered a right for a business and shouldnt be one. They are able to freely censor but if it passes into the realm of discrimination then it becomes dicey and opens them to legal disputes
1 Like
Businesses most certainly have the right to decide who can and cannot use their services. And they should. Signs like “no shirt, no shoes, no service” are an example of this.
1 Like
Well obviously the consequences are different, at least for now 
(coz i mean, look at the Xinjiang, it’s about as dystopian future model for me and you, as it can possibly get, if we as humanity will decide to keep falling that rabbit hole), but as a concept analogy should still stand
Yeah it’s really hard to follow their policy this days, a lot of people got demonetized or blasted out for allegedly not following TOS, yet actually following them and appear like few months later if they have enough money for layer…Just to get blasted again
Never said they cant deny someone service, but you are not allowed to discriminate against a group based on criteria that falls under discrimination. Your example does not fall under that but if you for instance deny service to people who are gay because you dont like gays then you have gone into discrimination territory and that is NOT a right
Denying service is discrimination my friend, regardless of who is being denied. We (at least in the US) have decided that discriminating against certain groups is illegal. Pretty much all of these are based on characteristics that one cannot change because they are a part of their genetics. Which isn’t a bad thing.
Something that isn’t protected is political views. Say for the sake of argument I have some coffee shop that’s reasonably popular. I don’t want nazis or marxists in my shop. Should I be forced to allow them in?
1 Like
Personally i believe in freedom of association (because it would simply reduce amount of actual conflicts in general, besides if it’s business which discriminate people it won’t live very long in 21 century, obviously), however to include social networks / big tech to that is suicidal at the very least…
They’re not barber shops or bakery, they’re almost like proto-governments at that point, with nearly zero liability and unparalleled amount of power over thought and behavior of their users.
This thread has been really peaceful up to this point. If it gets personal or political you know the drill 
4 Likes
I don’t disagree! The problem I see is how do we distinguish who these proposed laws would apply to?
1 Like
Not from a legal standpoint no, maybe emotional but legal its
“grant by statute of particular privileges to a class arbitrarily designated from a sizable number of persons, where no reasonable distinction exists between the favored and disfavored classes’”
You have to prove discrimination beyond reasonable doubt
Still seems fairly peaceful to me but fair enough
1 Like