this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
1674 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59708 readers
1960 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A search for Threads content on Twitter currently brings up zero results, despite plenty of links to Meta’s microblogging rival being posted on the platform.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 93 points 1 year ago (55 children)

how is that free speech, twitter is blocking a competitor for obvious reasons

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago (21 children)

Because anyone who cries "freeze peach!" at any provocation are really just people that want to say hateful shit without repercussions. Generally, those same people are the ones to shut other people down from expressing their own freedom of speech.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (18 children)

Anyone that cries "free speech" when government isn't involved at all is a dolt

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they think there are legal requirements then yes they are. But wanting platforms to be more open in general is not necessarily a doltish thing. Yes twitter has the legal right to ban anyone they want, but that doesn't mean that's a good thing or we shouldn't seek out platforms that aren't so arbitrarily censorious.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

When people cry free speech they are invoking the US constitution. They fail to recognize it only pertains to the government.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You cannot claim this on behalf of other people. I myself sometimes refer to lax moderation rules as "free speech focused" moderation. It has nothing to do with the government.

That isn't to say that some, or even many, people don't use the phrase assuming that it is their constitutionally protected right to spread vitriol on the internet. But to imply that this is the only common meaning is disingenuous.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Free speech is the freedom to speak about the government. That's all it is. That's it. If a company practices free speech all they're doing is exercising thier freedom to criticize the government. Same with an individual.

There is no other form of free speech. It exists solely to counter the government.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't police the English language. I don't know what else to tell you.

One phrase can refer to multiple things; "free speech" often refers to the ability to say whatever you like* without repurcussions from an authoritative figure, be that the government, Elon Musk's cronies, or Lemmy moderators. Obviously it is not a constitutionally protected right in the latter contexts, but then again the phrase wasn't "right to free speech."

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok dude sure thing.
Excuse me, I have swim my car to work.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

are you saying that free speech as a concept was invented by the US Government? and that the right to free speech can only be enforced by it?

free speech can mean, and has meant, many things to many different people. the concept has been around for over 1000 years. there's plenty more to say about "free speech" than just the rights specifically provided to american citizens.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

No. Freedom of speech as a concept means freedom to criticize the government. Not just the US government.

Anyone that thinks otherwise, as someone once said, is a dolt.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

You're the dolt lmao no one else has such a restrictive definition of the word. Context matters.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Freedom of speech is an ideal before it is a law. Even if we lived in a utopian classless society without a government we could still have the concept that everyone deserves the right to say what they wish.

If it can exist without the government then logically it cannot strictly refer to the government.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From your peers. For example if I say I am an atheist in a group of religious people and they kill me because of it - I don't have freedom of speech.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's not what freedom of speech is.
You obviously have no desire to learn anything so I'll just say have a good day. Enjoy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Go to Google and search "define freedom of speech"

the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint.

It doesn't say government anywhere there. I think I know where you are coming from - lots of people complain about private businesses or organizations not honoring freedom of speech and they may not be aware that legally only the government gives you the right to speech.

Ie a business can tell you to leave if you say something offensive or a university doesn't have to accept a fascist lecturer.

I think you learned something about that and want to tell everyone but don't worry - everyone knows. I'd imagine most people here are college educated.

Freedom of speech is an ideal borne out of the enlightenment. Just like the pursuit of happiness or liberty. These ideas are not inextricably tied to governments.

For example a slave owner giving their slave freedom. Nothing to do with government but it is an expansion of liberty. Of course modern liberal governments also guarantee liberty but it didn't originate the idea nor has exclusive use of the concept.

It's a general, abstract thing.

Also you're right, I have no desire at all to learn from you because I have determined you're out of your element. Really this message is for other people reading

load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
load more comments (51 replies)