Message from @♓♏♋
Discord ID: 492273627018821633
sure we would
Hell mastercard wouldn't have denied service to Alex Jones.
Advertisers fear negative brand association
the shitstorm of purity the MSM and Leftist hatemobs cause, makes companies afraid
That is Advertisers, not Silicon Valley.
cuz they fear it will cost them money, because they dont understand that this is a very small minority who doesn't even buy into things
Sillicon Valley does it too
Anyways I am heading to bed.
any company wants to sell things, goods, services, information
yes
go sleep 😛
Later all.
cya
Did you watch the whole thing?
cba
12 minutes of shitty Sonic snake quotes
Well that's not what it is at all.
Want me to find a script?
why not just tell me what i'm supposed to consider a prophecy
Lots of things they mention
Colonel:You exercise your right to "freedom" and this is the result.
All rhetoric to avoid conflict and protect each other from hurt.
The untested truths spun by different interests continue to churn and accumulate in the sandbox of political correctness and value systems.
Rose:Everyone withdraws into their own small gated community, afraid of a larger forum.
They stay inside their little ponds,
leaking whatever "truth" suits them into the growing cesspool of society at large.
but thats how its always been
Well that's just a piece of the dialogue
But anyway
This sounds pretty bad. I think this has more to do with EU rather than Big Tech. Getting a government involved in being able to tell these companies what to do is not the answer.
who komm susser todd rn
<:reimusun:319184406340173824> 🔫 ✝
Internet constitution! 😛
only solution
Doc, who do you trust to write one? Reddit? 4chan? Congress? If the US writes it the EU will just write their own.
If Silicon Valley was smart they would only censor illegal content period .
They want to make money 💰 not police people
they ain't smart, they are greedy
and Nazis
im not worried about silicon valley probs gonna end up in the ocean soon anyways
<a:Water:393797164192759813>
I'd trust anyone to write one @Poppy Rider ,
If what is written is neutral enough, fair enough and solid enough so its not to be abused is a different issue.
Remember, even the US constitution wasn't completed when it was first accepted, what with amendments still being added
But it's a better approach than letting them freely take peoples speech away in favor of others,
And to "regulate" only leaves them open to whoever is in charge to call the shots.
You need a bill of rights, not a system of regulation
I would tend to agree but we are not in the good old days. I don't really mind YT or FB banning ppl, it sucks and it's unfair but it's not the end of the world, the net is a big place. I think a site like YT has the right to remove anyone for anyreason and I would not like that right taken away through regulation or a bill of rights.
I think we can all agree that government regulation is possibly the worst thing that can happen here. But a bill of rights is not much different. Look at the people in power, the people that would be writing it and voting on it. These people can not be trusted with such an important task right now.
FB is falling out of favour in the west and it's a trend that will happen in Africa as well. I think we should ride this out for a decade or so and see where the chips land.
We are like a toddler right now that's learning to run, we need to be allowed to fall over a few times.
Tbh, I think government regulation is required. Youtube and twitter have way too big of a monopoly on online speech
That's nonsense. The tech industry has formed a kind of cartel and if it is allowed to, it is completely possible to seal a given website off the net. Google search alone makes or breaks businesses.
The question is Youtube more of a newspaper or more like a telephone. I think the answer there is obvious. Google makes very little content on it's own and is really just hosting and indexing content for other people. It's much more like a telephone or the postal mail. We wouldn't claim that AT&T has a "right to deny phone service for any reason." We also know what happens when the telecoms are allowed to cheat--They elected the only president to have lost a majority of the electorate and get elected anyway by leaking information to their preferred political party.
When big companies like Google or Western Union can essentially dictate democracy by simply refusing service, it becomes a question of whether we really live in a free state.
As it is, Europe is regulating the internet but Europe doesn't have the same commitment to freedom of speech the US does. The US *must* counter-regulate.