I've seen the phrase 'threat to democracy' thrown around this week to justify silencing voices. If you're afraid of what someone who thinks differently will vote for, then maybe democracy itself is the problem.
Readit NewsDead Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
bra-ket commented on Stripe quits processing payments for Trump campaign website cnet.com/news/stripe-repo... · Posted by u/mjfern
Deleted Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
bra-ket commented on Ask HN: What are your thoughts on Parler ban by Big techs? · Posted by u/striker_axel
I approve.
I've commented so much about this in the past I'll just say this: I think the conception of social media as lofty forums for society to wrestle with serious issues is horse crap. Either I'm some genius (I'm not), or what you see online is what you get: 99% garbage.
The way people discuss online censorship is like that scene from Star Wars 'I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.'
Facebook Twitter et al are just companies, and companies come and go. They are a source of amusement, to be sure, but, at their most serious, they spread more darkness than light. Sci-hub is more likely to contribute to a cure for cancer, or heart disease. If Instagram called it quits tomorrow, it would no more detriment the life of the average person than if a restaurant or a disco they liked went out of business.
In short: these social media websites, as designed, are just bad at, for lack of a better phrase, 'enlightenment stuff'. Millions of people use them (sure, someone pooped out a good physics paper on 4chan, even) but they mainly produce memes and self-promotional nonsense. Not worth ruining liberal democracy, and social harmony over.
Facebook, Twitter and Google are monopolies. They carry different weight than simply private corporations, and with great power comes great responsibility.