alt Hacker NewsWhich is true here, except "do anything you want" is "be displeasing to Kuwait".
It's all "they're a private company, they can ban anyone they want" right up until they ban someone who promoters of that idea don't like. Then they're suddenly horrible people for being a private company that bans anyone they want.
Replies
mystraline • yesterday at 8:12 PM
> It's all "they're a private company, they can ban anyone they want" right up until they ban someone who promoters of that idea don't like. Then they're suddenly horrible people for being a private company that bans anyone they want.
If they are NOT acting as an impartial aggregator and only censoring/deleting when the law demands, then they should NOT be covered under Section 230.
Thats quite simple.
➕ show 2 replies
if they are doing business in kuwait, theyre gonna be reponsible to kuwaiti law.
> Then they're suddenly horrible people for being a private company that bans anyone they want.
with twitter, people did exactly what is intended - if you dont like it, make your own. now there is truth social and blue sky and threads.
people say twitter is run by horrible people, but nobody is restricting musk's rights to have a vanity project. its a right to speech, not to be liked