News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by kevinmchugh on Friday March 08, 2019 @09:45AM (#19337859)
> You could require freedom of speech apply to industry leaders for example.

What does this mean? Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey, Jeff Bezos, et al already have their constitutionally protected speech, except for where their roles as executives at public companies restrict them. If they find those restrictions onerous they can leave their roles.

Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by dEnigma on Friday March 08, 2019 @09:55AM (#19337960)
I think they meant requiring industry-leading companies to apply freedom of speech on their platforms. That is, no censoring of comments, videos, reviews, etc. as long as they don't violate the law.
Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by kevinmchugh on Friday March 08, 2019 @10:01AM (#19338029)
So the idea is to "require freedom of speech to apply" by prohibiting corporations from setting their own terms of service, spam policies, etc? That sounds like a very serious restraint of speech.
Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by apcragg on Friday March 08, 2019 @10:55AM (#19338626)
The government cannot compel speech. I don't think that using the power of the government to require some types of speech against the wishes of private entities solves the problem you think it's solving...
Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by dEnigma on Friday March 08, 2019 @11:23AM (#19338968)
To clarify: I was just explaining what the above commenter meant, not stating my own opinion on the matter.
Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by sleepysysadmin on Friday March 08, 2019 @12:25PM (#19339681)
If Twitter decides tomorrow to ban the right-wing from their platform. They absolutely legally can. If you watch the recent Joe Rogan video with Tim Pool and Jack Dorsey. They didn't realize they were slowly banning the right-wing and allowing left-wing terrorists to stay on Twitter. They absolutely didn't realize they were doing this and they are going to look at fixing this.

The government however could come in and simply make it that you have freedom of speech on social media. So if Twitter bans someone for saying "a man cannot be a woman" that person can sue them.

The democrats will NOT do this however, the current censorship on social media is benefiting the left-wing.

Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by kevinmchugh on Friday March 08, 2019 @12:36PM (#19339841)
The company twitter has set its terms of service. That is speech. What you're suggesting is eliminating the corporation's ability to do speak in that manner.

Do you believe the US government has the ability to simply prohibit speech by corporate entities? Is it in accordance with free speech principles for a federal government to prohibit certain types of speech?

Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by sleepysysadmin on Friday March 08, 2019 @01:27PM (#19340458)
By forcing freedom of speech onto twitter for example. I don't see how that would be restricting their speech.

Personally I see this as something that will come eventually. However, I don't think that's what Twitter should do.

My idea is that twitter should act more like the united nations. You create a 'diplomatic immunity' type of account that people can request. It can be something like:

Minimum 50,000 followers.

Account history of 1 year.

If approved you can no longer edit or delete your posts; but you also cant be kicked off twitter or other be harmed by rules of twitter.

this by itself will solve the problem that twitter has.

Re:Elizabeth Warren Proposes Breaking Up Tech Giants Like Am... by smadge on Friday March 08, 2019 @03:56PM (#19342085)
I don't think terms of service, basically a contract, fall under free speech. If you and I make a verbal contract that you will assassinate someone we are still breaking the law because assassinations are illegal. Our free speech isn't being violated when we are arrested for doing something illegal.