agiroth

No seriously how deep does this go? Private internet? Balkanize the world so that the only possible outcome is war?

This isn't being thought through.

Yes, it is. It requires some impressive mental gymnastics to claim that on the one hand you have free speech, and on the other you have no realistic ability to exercise it. A right - especially a natural right - is only a right when it can be meaningfully exercised.

In particular, free speech only applies to speech you don't like, because nobody is attempting to shut down memes of cute kittens.

And yet somehow have never resorted to saying who can and cannot use their service based on their political beliefs.

Keep trying.

Absolutely but the platform isn't doing the amplification, people do. This is the same thing as someone copying your chant on a street in front of a courthouse. The street isn't doing the amplifying, the people are.

> You have never had the right of free speech on someone else’s property.

Wrong. You always do. They simply have free speech too.

Yes. NYT is making an editorial decision. Google publishing an app is much more akin to you making a phone call - they are the carrier, nothing else, because they control the end of line.

If there were a large, vibrant community of public squares, I'd very much agree with you; the problem is that the network effect means that there will only ever be 2-3 big ones. It's a form of natural monopoly if not monopoly-in-fact and that has to be accounted for if "the people" are to remain in control of their ability to exercise their rights.

So, one solution would be to foster an environment where Twitter et.al lose their power because they really CAN'T lock people in anymore and I would absolutely love to see such a future.

But unfortunately that isn't where we are right now and the incentives around us are all set up to ensure it never changes.

> Free speech != guaranteed access to a company providing access to a big audience

If that's what were happening you'd probably have a point, but it isn't. "Not deleting" something is not the same as providing the audience, nor amplifying.

And, by the way, yes free speech does imply some obligations on the rest of us. Speech is not free if you are not free to exercise it; "you're free to talk in a prison cell" type of thinking isn't productive because it avoids the entire conversation.

Free speech has absolutely nothing to do with the government, by the way. Just because one country wrote down something called "The 1st Amendment" doesn't mean that somehow free speech only exists in that country and only when the government gives it to you. Free speech is a natural right that we all have and nobody has the right to silence anyone else: The 1st is simply one aspect of that.

The fact that society at large has lost that value cannot be viewed as a good thing and all the people in this thread defending the silencing of millions because they disagree with them politically is beyond shameful.

It's important to distinguish that "not deleting something" is NOT the same as amplifying it.

Amplifying it would be pasting images and links to Parler all over the Google Play splash page and all over the Google Play website, sending emails to all its gmail users to download Parler, or inserting Parler ads into some % of its ad impressions.

They aren't doing that. "Leave it alone" is not the same thing as amplification, that's literally the distinction that is made in Section 230.

The ONLY thing being asked for is that Parler polices itself (or the authorities get involved where appropriate), and that Google and Apple leave it be because all they do is serve as the conduit to get it onto the device they control.

That is the way the world SHOULD work. No it doesn't give you the adrenaline rush of enforcing your desires on the world, but that's not a good thing to be enabling in the first place.

If they had no control over the stores used to get apps on devices, the whole question would be moot. Their duopoly leads to this issue. Frankly, that control should be taken away.

This is uncalled for. Pointing out Twitter's political bias on a technology forum is relevant, whether you agree with the comment or not.

Additional vote for Firefox. Lately it's been less buggy for me than Chrome even.