Big Tech and Social Media

[ThxOne]

Beneficial to most as it gives people a platform to yell from and ways to unite as well as reunite with fellow humans. That is all well and good but when companies like Twitter discriminate against and block people because they are on the "other side" something needs to be done. Twitter doesn't discriminate on who they will make money from. I think social media companies need to be transparent and need to keep their nose out of anything that isn't directed at themselves. If they are going to use their company to enact their own political views then they should not be allowed to collect revenue from users of their platform.

 

[metalheadjoe]

Delete it. You'll be happier.

 

[ThxOne]

I don't use Twitter that often. I just think these companies have way to much power and or control over what people say or do. Everyone wants to be everyone's dad but nobody wants to raise their own kids. Pathetic.

 

[Coolhand20th]

Speaking of kids a perfect example of not controlling your kids and watching them. Last Friday I was my parents helping my dad work on his snowmobiles. I leave to stop at the small gas station by their house (fyi they live in the middle of nowhere in the Northwoods) but there is people that live around the 2 small lakes there so there is a gas station that has a ton of stuff, bait, sub restaurant, ice cream shop and so on. Stopped because it was 7 at night and I was hungry. The way the place is it goes north and south with a thin but long building. I pulled up so the person working could see the gas pump. This guy had 4 kids 2 boys 2 girls running around the gas pumps throwing pieces of ice from the ground. One of them precedes to get next to the front quarter panel and hide there while the one kid throws ice at him. I told their father "Hey how about controlling your kids because if my vehicle gets hit my lawyer and insurance company is going to rip you a new one" He tells me to "Eff Off and that they are just kids and it is just a vehicle get over it." Had a few choice words for him. As I was pulling out they were still running around throwing ice even saw it hit the building a couple times.

 

[metalheadjoe]

Did you hear google removed Parler from their app store?

I don't have any social media because I realized that it caused more negative emotions than positive. Anything you like about social media can be accessed through other means. Want to keep up with your family? Call them. Want to see offroading pictures? Use the internet. It makes more sense to get rid of it than to expect it to meet your expectations.

 

[ThxOne]

I'm Gen X. I grew up without all this crap so yes, I still call family as apposed to texting them. I still go and get my own food as apposed to using "doordash" apps. But when everyone is force fed all this crap and then told they need to use it and then are told how they can use it, it's gone to far. I have to use 3 different apps for work, one of which is a social media app. I deliver pizza... I don't care about talking to people at the store about pizza through my phone. WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME BUILDING!!! It's crazy.

 

[Buck]

People should be very worried about Big Tech censoring the president. Imagine that. It'll now happen to every president after Trump. I am not going to be ruled over by corporate overlords. Idc if you like Trump or not, idc, that's irrelevant. The point is that censoring speech is the most anti-American thing that they could do. They're literally sh*tting on the fundamental freedoms that we have as individuals. If Big Tech can censor the president of the US, imagine what they're going to do to YOU. This is about tearing the roots out of our country, which is our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. Those documents and freedoms are what made everybody want to move to America. Idc what side you're on, censorship is EVIL. Freedom of speech is a human right, and I'm willing to fight to keep my rights, to whatever extent my chronically ill azz can. I've been censored off the internet personally, and I'm not even political, other than being a very heavy pro-constitutional person.

After they tell people what they can and can't say and can enforce communist-like "hate speech" laws, then they're going to start rounding people up, the gov is. They'll eventually come for everybody, they're just censoring who's easiest to right now. Then once they're done censoring the easy people, they'll come for everyone, because you didn't stand up for people's rights that you disagree with.

 

[SlugButter]

They are private companies, so they are technically free to do what they want, however, they are also monopolies to which other laws need to apply. 70% of our stupid society get their news from these monopolies, so if they are going to monopolize the news, they need to expect new laws that regulate their ability to remove free speech. They even censored the new york Times on their own Facebook page.

 

[SlugButter]

The Kremlin and Iran can still tweet, but our president can’t. That is blatantly BS.

 

[Buck]

They are private companies, so they are technically free to do what they want, however, they are also monopolies to which other laws need to apply. 70% of our stupid society get their news from these monopolies, so if they are going to monopolize the news, they need to expect new laws that regulate their ability to remove free speech. They even censored the new york Times on their own Facebook page.

No, that's not quite correct. They are protected under Section 230, which means they're a public square, which means they can't censor. If they start censoring, they violate section 230 and become liable for stuff posted on their sites.

 

[SlugButter]

No, that's not quite correct. They are protected under Section 230, which means they're a public square, which means they can't censor. If they start censoring, they violate section 230 and become liable for stuff posted on their sites.

I just go there for memes and trolling idiots, so I’m not up on the laws honestly.

 

[Buck]

No, that's not quite correct. They are protected under Section 230, which means they're a public square, which means they can't censor. If they start censoring, they violate section 230 and become liable for stuff posted on their sites.

There's large precedent for Section 230. Just because it's digital, it doesn't change the fundamentals. If they claim section 230, they cannot censor speech, unless it's threats, basically, or child porn, stuff like that. They are censoring their political enemies.

 

[SlugButter]

There's large precedent for Section 230. Just because it's digital, it doesn't change the fundamentals. If they claim section 230, they cannot censor speech, unless it's threats, basically, or child porn, stuff like that. They are censoring their political enemies.

Even without knowing what section 230 is, it has to be obvious to anyone that they are censoring political enemies. Even Biden fans should know that.

 

[Buck]

Even without knowing what section 230 is, it has to be obvious to anyone that they are censoring political enemies. Even Biden fans should know that.

Section 230 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[ThxOne]

I am curious of what the next wave of new social media groups look like.