A few days ago, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Texas law that prohibited Big Tech from censoring content on their platforms. This is being heralded as a big win for free speech by Texas governor Jim Abbott and many others on the Right.
“I've argued in the past, and still believe, that the the utility of PA requirements on private businesses has long expired, that they're now just cudgels for the cynical, the self-serving, and bottom-dwelling serial-suers, and that organic and evolutionary forces would better challenge and remedy those who'd discriminate. In other words, it’s time to take the next step toward liberty and end those requirements.“
Peter, thank you as always for the thoughtful and multifaceted approach.
We’ve exchanged on this topic before.
As an original designer of the chat rooms, I still feel the current asocial media has reached ‘utility status’.
I’ve been in the position of having to curate rooms for 10000s of users On a free venue.
The one item that remains pivotal, Recourse.
Large or small any site MUST allow the user recourse to a block or filter. Sadly these companies can’t get beyond self-interest blindness. I do loathe the idea of an external agency, perhaps better if it’s an industry supported one .vs. a govt one.
But an auditable trail with all its revelations for site and user would allow a history to evolve.
Market forces have often included such devices, given the current abuse by big tech, and emerging laws this would give documentation to any recourse.
As a model i also remember (years back) when the IRS was forced out into the public court system where it could not as easily beat the taxpayer about head/shoulders.
Note that my concern is to create an auditable recourse for those being maligned by BigTech, as they control both transport and content their invincibility is probably more insidious then the TPC.
In the days pre-Judge Greene when TPC (aka Bell Telephone) only controlled transport it was bad, but that currently BigTech offers the only show in town, controls where you sit, and moderates your right to speak, all should see this behaviors breadth and history, if one might say a list of abuses and usurpations.
Admittedly all systems and services need adjusting, as does the adjusting need adjusting. I think we are past the tipping point of abuse, and if the rebound causes a major reduction in asocial media scope and reach, its likely time for its demise.
Many of us never thought its roots would make it past a year, perhaps its long overdue to have another pointless reason to keep our faces stuck in the Nu-boobtoob lost to history.
There is a libertarian argument that a private business has the right to discriminate and that the competitive free market will punish companies that turn away paying customers and qualified job applicants for no good reason. But, as you say, the “organic” option is not always viable. As unfair as it would be to label this view as “racist”, we can’t deny that it would be embraced by racists, putting libertarians in bad company and preventing any kind of rational discussion. This comes under the heading of “pick your battles”.
“I've argued in the past, and still believe, that the the utility of PA requirements on private businesses has long expired, that they're now just cudgels for the cynical, the self-serving, and bottom-dwelling serial-suers, and that organic and evolutionary forces would better challenge and remedy those who'd discriminate. In other words, it’s time to take the next step toward liberty and end those requirements.“
Peter, thank you as always for the thoughtful and multifaceted approach.
We’ve exchanged on this topic before.
As an original designer of the chat rooms, I still feel the current asocial media has reached ‘utility status’.
I’ve been in the position of having to curate rooms for 10000s of users On a free venue.
The one item that remains pivotal, Recourse.
Large or small any site MUST allow the user recourse to a block or filter. Sadly these companies can’t get beyond self-interest blindness. I do loathe the idea of an external agency, perhaps better if it’s an industry supported one .vs. a govt one.
But an auditable trail with all its revelations for site and user would allow a history to evolve.
Market forces have often included such devices, given the current abuse by big tech, and emerging laws this would give documentation to any recourse.
…respectfully
A collection of agreements on points, assuredly.
As a model i also remember (years back) when the IRS was forced out into the public court system where it could not as easily beat the taxpayer about head/shoulders.
Note that my concern is to create an auditable recourse for those being maligned by BigTech, as they control both transport and content their invincibility is probably more insidious then the TPC.
In the days pre-Judge Greene when TPC (aka Bell Telephone) only controlled transport it was bad, but that currently BigTech offers the only show in town, controls where you sit, and moderates your right to speak, all should see this behaviors breadth and history, if one might say a list of abuses and usurpations.
Admittedly all systems and services need adjusting, as does the adjusting need adjusting. I think we are past the tipping point of abuse, and if the rebound causes a major reduction in asocial media scope and reach, its likely time for its demise.
Many of us never thought its roots would make it past a year, perhaps its long overdue to have another pointless reason to keep our faces stuck in the Nu-boobtoob lost to history.
but... thanks again for the discussion.
There is a libertarian argument that a private business has the right to discriminate and that the competitive free market will punish companies that turn away paying customers and qualified job applicants for no good reason. But, as you say, the “organic” option is not always viable. As unfair as it would be to label this view as “racist”, we can’t deny that it would be embraced by racists, putting libertarians in bad company and preventing any kind of rational discussion. This comes under the heading of “pick your battles”.