Jump to content

Free speech debate in America


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Liberals to Conservatives..."you can't discriminate against people."   Conservatives to Liberals..."you are discriminating against me by not allowing me to discriminate others"   T

It's not about free speech, literally no private company cares about free speech. It's always been about taking the temperature of the room and seeing what standards your company and services abide by

1 minute ago, patsplat said:

And you what do you know, notice how he still has a platform to complain on.

 

Leave it up to your woke ass cancel culture and no one will have a platform unless its sole purpose is to wholeheartedly agree with said state-sponsored platform.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, NashvilleNinja said:

 

Leave it up to your woke ass cancel culture and no one will have a platform unless its sole purpose is to wholeheartedly agree with said state-sponsored platform.


Dude this whole thread is "don't you think the state should regulate these private companies"

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, patsplat said:

There is nothing wrong with cancel culture.  We need more cancel culture. 

Again, this is debatable and not a clear black and white issue. 

 

37 minutes ago, patsplat said:

We should also be able to cancel platforms.  You should be able to export your profile from facebook, load it up elsewhere, and set your profile to permanent redirect.  You should own your data.

Platforms aren’t uniform. It’s not as easy as Congress passing a law so we can port our phone numbers to move from Verizon to Sprint. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, OzTitan said:

It's not about free speech, literally no private company cares about free speech. It's always been about taking the temperature of the room and seeing what standards your company and services abide by are acceptable by the general public. It's about their image and brand.

They just want to maximize profit and avoid government regulation. They know which way the pendulum is swinging in DC. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, patsplat said:You should own your data.

 

 

A story I will never forget was from my pops when he worked with the Nashville government on security in the healthcare field in the early 2000’s. They had a big board together with HCA, Vanderbilt, St. Thomas, the insurance companies, bureaucrats, and a single non-affiliated lawyer. 
 

The topic came up of who owns the healthcare records. 
 

The hospital said we house and maintain the records they belong to us. 
 

The insurance company said we pay almost all of the claims involved with every patient so they belong to us. 
 

My pops interjected and said ‘well hell it’s my record it belongs to me’. 
 

They then looked at the lawyer and said what do you think? “It depends on who

is paying me”

 

The same applies here. Also, SK’s OP was obviously meant as a discussion into

why people can logically see both sides. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@NashvilleNinja The Ron Paul Institute is all in on making excuses.  Here's a few headlines.  And no, I'm not linking to them, because I'm under no obligation to support their platform:


1/6: Memorandum: How The 2020 Election Could Have Been Stolen
1/7: The Charge of Treason and the Danger to Democracy
1/7: What's Really Behind The Capitol Hill Chaos?
1/7: MSM Already Using Capitol Hill Riot To Call For More Internet Censorship
1/8: The Capitol Riot Wasn’t a Coup. It Wasn't Even Close.
1/8: I Hate Federal Commissions, But Americans Need One To Look Into The 2020 Election
1/9: Thoughts on a 'Right Wing Insurrection'
1/9: With unilateral censorship of a sitting US president, Big Tech has proven it’s more powerful than any government
1/11: The ‘War On Terror’ Comes Home
 

I'm having trouble feeling for a group that:

  1. drummed up support for the Capitol Riot
  2. minimized the impact of the Capitol Riot
  3. complained about consequences of the Capitol Riot
  4. is actively trying to spin the conversation into something other than a seditious attack

It's not surprising to see that Facebook took action against this advertiser, especially when the threat of more violence remains.

Edited by patsplat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone is howling about Parler and conservatives, and not the press that was attacked at the riot.  If you don't care about inciting physical attacks on the press, then you don't care about free speech.

There might be a topic of conversation here, but it's not about free speech.

 

Rather the topic is the poor victimized Trumpets who were miss-understood when they staged a coup.

Edited by patsplat
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, patsplat said:

 

The law has actually already been passed in California.  Enforcement is the next frontier:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Consumer_Privacy_Act

Getting your personal data exported is not the problem. It’s saying you should be able to just easily import it up to other separate platform you want to move to. You can start a new account with some other site, but you are starting that account from scratch. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Starkiller said:

Getting your personal data exported is not the problem. It’s saying you should be able to just easily import it up to other separate platform you want to move to. You can start a new account with some other site, but you are starting that account from scratch. 


Platforms are all Hotel California with your data.  They'll build the wizards to get you in, but will never let you out without regulation.  The California law isn't unique either.  Europe also has strong data privacy laws.  In principle, it's the same thing as your example of the phone number -- you own your number, and can move it between networks.

As awkward as it may sound, it's a hell of a lot better than trying to introduce government panels to review editorial decisions.  Repealing Section 230 would also be a mess, because then you'd be rewarding the biggest players with the biggest war chests i.e. Facebook.

So make it easier for people to leave.  Help the market build better products not just bigger ones.

Edited by patsplat
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, NashvilleNinja said:

 

Checks and balances are good. Bans and silences are not.

 

People get kicked out of bars all the time.  Someone gets kicked out of a bar and no other bar is willing to let them in?  And they are the subject of a police investigation?

I don't think the problem is the first bar that 86'd their ass.

 

Edited by patsplat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...