Five years ago, today:
In case the above is memory-holed, an image version:
(Professor Saad corrected his typo (“FREE societies”) in a follow-up, so this also reminds me that it has been two years since Elon Musk acquired Twitter. Where’s the Edit button for replies?)
Some other comments from fall 2019:
- You running for President of China?
- Sorry you don’t like the constitution. Maybe you should run for leader of a different country.
- Thank god this hysterical candidate who tramples on the constitution will never be President.
- Democrats want to ban all speech they disagree with. Bunch of fascists. Good luck keeping the 1st amendment if Dems ever get full power.
- So you are against the 1st amendment?
Dear Leader’s Harris’s second in command comrade Waltz’s radio ads say that Dear Leader is there to defend freedom. I guess freedom to be educated by correct comrades.
What is your take on NVIDIA container toolkit bug? Containers seem to be very unsafe.
Phil – what are your personal limits for comments on your blog? Although you leave most low quality comments alone, I’m sure you have some idea of a line in the sand where you would remove a comment.
If you do have some standard you keep that necessitated removal of a comment – would you entertain arguments that your removal of said comment went against principals of free speech?
I’m not sure why you believe somebody recommending twitter maintain some standard for use would necessarily be a free speech issue.
In the 7th grade, I learned that the 1A constrains what the federal government can do, not a private citizen. You should know that.
As most know my absolute favorite topic is the so called content moderation policy. Phil or his minions will block a comment that contains a certain slang name for black people that rhymes with digger. Even if one substitutes a 1 for an I he will still block the comment entirely. This is not true for other forbidden words. Ad hominem attacks are discouraged but I routinely call Mike a dumb dumb with no content moderation. The most discouraged comments are those that review the post such as “this is great”. However they are routinely allowed. Other topics that do not seem allowed are advertisements and any mention of greenspun v greenspun court cases.
@Give me Liberty – I’m sure you are quite the constitutional scholar, though I’m having trouble understanding your point. Why should there be an uproar over a Senator asking a private business (Twitter) to uphold standards? Do you believe that chills free speech? Do you believe a Senator making that statement reflects unconstitutional behavior?
Is this Craig 1.0, who was an absolutist libertarian, or Craig 2.0?
@Craig, if Harris believes Trump’s words are dangerous, and Trump is taking our freedom away, Harris should ask Congress to pass a law to force X to ban Trump. She cannot tell X, a private or non private entity, to take Trump’s or anyone else’s freedom of speech away but yet she continues to post and tell us Trump is dangerous.
For example, I’m totally against rap music with profanity words, do I have the right to tell a business to stop selling such music?
Gad Saad response to Harris is prompt and just.
I think any social media site with more than 5% of Americans as users has to be put into a separate category from an individual’s weblog or a web site, such as https://pinside.com/ devoted to a topic. The function of a Facebook or a Twitter is not to promote one individual’s point of view nor to support a learning community. The function is to facilitate expression. So the moderation policy on this blog isn’t relevant.
Also, when one of 100 U.S. senators tells a social media site to suppress speech that’s not comparable, under the First Amendment, to a peasant telling a social media site to suppress speech. The American peasant doesn’t have the ability to influence the FBI, for example.