On @triggerpod, Sam Harris said that if Trump did not violate Twitter's terms of service, he certainly violated the terms of service that they should have had in place. Solid and well-reasoned argument. John, you did not commit a crime according to our laws. But you are a
32
110
5
1,324
criminal according to the laws that we should have had on the books. Hence, John, in reality, you are a criminal because you know, Twitter is a private company (so no freedom of speech infringement) and well you violated the terms of service that they should have had.
4
40
778
In The Parasitic Mind, I discuss the utter BULLSHIT of the "but bruh, it's a private company" argument when it comes to infringement of free speech by social media companies. It is an argument made by pedantic teenagers and/or anointed "intellectuals."
37
71
3
1,086
Replying to @GadSaad
If we agree to a limitation, then would you not also agree we are ethically responsible to uphold that agreement? Any "Terms of Service" on a site requiring registration and an "I agree" from a given user will likely have limits on speech, content, age - our ISPs do this as well.

Aug 19, 2022 · 5:54 AM UTC