Saturday, April 28, 2018
GRAB YOUR POPCORN: During Testimony Diamond and Silk Take On a Congressman
From my perspective, Facebook, being a private organization, should be able to censor anyone they want, though the censorship they are doing appears to be evil--it just doesn't violate the NAP. So I do not agree with the complaint of Diamond and Silk are making before an even more evil government.
The government should stay out of it.
That said, I admire the spunk shown by the ladies in responding to congressional testimony. I wish more of those who testified before Congress had the courage to tell congressmen how they really felt.
-Robert Wenzel
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Just wait until phone, water, and electric companies and banks refuse you service because they don't like your viewpoints.
ReplyDeleteBanks and credit card processing companies already have done that for companies that sell firearms.
DeleteI still maintain that Facebook and Youtube are violating their terms of service which indicate that they will function like a common carrier with a few exceptions for outrageous behavior. They can have any terms of service they want. Write some new ones which reflect their unlimited right to ban anyone for any reason even if mean, nasty and irrational.
ReplyDeleteQuestion, is that what is normally referred to as an "ass whoopin"?
ReplyDeleteRobert,
ReplyDeleteYou are missing a huge point. You call them a private organization. They are private, like the Rand Corporation is private. All of these companies are directed by our intelligence agencies. No one gets to CEO unless they are a beautiful person.
See In-q-tel
The idea that high-tech oligopoly is somehow "private" is ridiculous to anyone who understands how high-tech works.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, the very existence of companies like Google and Facebook is heavily dependent on the government-granted monopoly rights aka "the Intellectual Property". There are no "ifs" and no "buts" about it. Every high-tech company routinely requires employees to sign an IP assignment agreement as a pre-condition of employment. These companies accumulate enormous patent portfolios (and claim copyrights in things like collections of data which they obtained (often without explicit informed consent) from their "customers"). Then they use their collections of these "rights" to ward off competition. An intellectual property lawsuit from a major tech company is usually end of the game for a startup - even if the lawsuit is totally without any merit. Oh, and they get to pick the IP for peanuts after the startups go belly-up (the shifty world of tech liquidators is something few people ever think about... until their ideas suddenly become "property" of some patent trolls; happened to me - now I can't even try to pursue my own interests and ideas I foolishly patented because guess who will get sued).
Secondly, the high-tech is the major recipient of freshly printed money. Without Fed and fractional-reserve banking there wouldn't be any unicorns.
Thirdly, as someone above already pointed out, tech is very deeply in bed with the government agencies.
If private property doesn’t exist in this country, no one should be able to control anything. It’s a good bet you don’t like those implications.
DeleteFecesbook and the rest need to be declared public utilities and treated as such. But this shows again how the left are the true racist and hate a diversity of viewpoints.
ReplyDeleteYour mom should be declared a public utility.
Delete