Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by cycomanic on Saturday September 17, 2022 @11:22PM
(#32884128)
Yes no proponent of this law ever complained about ISIS recruiting accounts being banned by twitter.
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by Karunamon on Saturday September 17, 2022 @11:44PM
(#32884222)
It is definitely federally illegal on the grounds of sanctions [1], if not treason, to knowingly provide service to the Islamic State. Twitter's hands are tied.
[1]: https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/Details.aspx?id=8759
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by cycomanic on Sunday September 18, 2022 @12:30AM
(#32884438)
So I guess government restricting free speech is fine?
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by sfifs on Sunday September 18, 2022 @08:47AM
(#32887086)
If you are in a democratic country, your society has explicitly granted your government authority through your voting systems to be the ultimate arbiter and parts of it can and does get revoked as the will of the society changes.
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by indecisive_user on Sunday September 18, 2022 @01:08AM
(#32884592)
Whataboutism. Government passing laws on free speech is unrelated to internet platforms enforcing arbitrary rules depending on the outrage mob of the week.
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by cycomanic on Sunday September 18, 2022 @12:33AM
(#32884456)
Also I am not certain that publishing tweets is a violation of sanctions?
Re:U.S. appeals court rejects big tech’s right to regulate o...
by concordDance on Sunday September 18, 2022 @06:37AM
(#32886287)
Personally I complained about that to anyone who'd listen.
That straw man incinerated and replaced with "mainstream conservative content", you still are not going to get any examples because the one providing that will be voted/flagged into invisibility, or if not that, the resulting discussion will be derailed into quibbling about the specific example rather than the much more important general principle.
It would be not at all honest to imply that this forum is anything but generally hostile to the American right, regardless of how extreme or not the take is. With that in mind, it is no surprise that specific positions are only ever mentioned indirectly, or negatively.