More YouTube Biased Censorship

[thecolorsblend]

That's not necessary.

Sure it is. Domain registrars, web hosts, DDoS mitigators, they've all proven again and again that they will bend the knee if someone decides that certain content is a no-no.

Meanwhile, the government cannot create laws or regulations concerning speech, unless it's to ensure and expand free speech. And I think that we've reached a point where that's necessary now.

 

[brinny]

That is easy for you to say. You’re not a builder. It is a start because you don’t have the knowledge to create an alternative. You’re dependent on someone else’s genius. And that will hold true for the next iteration and so on.

It is odd that none of the social media platforms have Christian founders. It is interesting that most of the technical giants can say the same. Maybe you’re praying for the wrong thing. You should lend your prayers and financial support to Christian startups.

The FTC will always side with the moneyed. That will never change. Even if the shell game says otherwise. They threatened the same about Microsoft and broke up the Bells only for them to rise again.

No country can survive without the creative class. You have benefited from the goods and services they produce. Capitalism rewards those with a capacity to build and compete. As it should.

There have always been "builders", including the builders of the Tower of Babble.

Might doesn't always make right, and giants sometimes topple and lose their heads in the most unusual and unexpected of ways.

In addition, using technology to "spy on" and "control" others is corrupt, to say the least.

At any rate, you have your opinion, and i have mine.

Thank you for the clarification.

 

[brinny]

brinny said: ↑
It's a start.

There’s an assumption there that an ostensibly Christian run site would be better. There are endless examples of horrendous things happening under the political direction of religious groups. And from what I’ve seen, the US right wing media doesn’t just control the information they put out, they doctor and tailor it until there is nothing left but their own, self-reinforcing message. I certainly wouldn’t want to use some nationalist, gun-toting ‘Christian’ media platform to tell me what to think, give me YouTube any day.

What has what you posted got to do with my post that you quoted from?

 

[Tom 1]

What has what you posted got to do with my post that you quoted from?

The idea of dismantling Amazon and the rest, to be replaced with...what exactly? The various groups whose banning from social media sites is so bemoaned seem like nothing more than deep pits of nastiness and misinformation.

 

[brinny]

brinny said: ↑
What has what you posted got to do with my post that you quoted from?

The idea of dismantling Amazon and the rest, to be replaced with...what exactly? The various groups whose banning from social media sites is so bemoaned seem like nothing more than deep pits of nastiness and misinformation.

 

[Tom 1]

Maybe I misunderstood. You were saying that the dismantlement of Amazon and Google would be a start. A start to what? Are you saying those organisations should be replaced with something else, or that there shouldn’t be any organisations of that sort at all?

 

[brinny]

Maybe I misunderstood. You were saying that the dismantlement of Amazon and Google would be a start. A start to what? Are you saying those organisations should be replaced with something else, or that there shouldn’t be any organisations of that sort at all?

Maybe I misunderstood.

I fear you have, sir.

For clarification, read over my posts in this thread.

Thank you kindly.

 

[Petunia]

That's not necessary.

Bluehost, one of the major web hosts in the world, is already owned by Mormons. If Mormons can set up a prominent web host, then certainly the Roman Catholic Church could at least set up servers for their own web site.

I know a guy who runs a system out of his front room. The room is full of server racks running his own hosting service (he started back in the early 80s with a bulletin board).

I frequented several Christian Bulletin Boards back in the day! This was before the world wide web existed. Oh what a wonderful memory! Thank you!

 

[RDKirk]

Sure it is. Domain registrars, web hosts, DDoS mitigators, they've all proven again and again that they will bend the knee if someone decides that certain content is a no-no.

Meanwhile, the government cannot create laws or regulations concerning speech, unless it's to ensure and expand free speech. And I think that we've reached a point where that's necessary now.

Domain registrars don't care. Everything else belongs to you if you set up your own web host--which is certainly possible for a moderate entrepreneur outlay.

As I pointed out, Bluehost is owned by Mormons, and they do what they want.

 

[RDKirk]

I frequented several Christian Bulletin Boards back in the day! This was before the world wide web existed. Oh what a wonderful memory! Thank you!

So did I. My favorite was actually a Catholic board.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Domain registrars don't care.

Yes, they do. Or they can at least be browbeaten. Some klan guy got his domain registration revoked a few years ago. I think the same thing just happened to 8chan as well.

Everything else belongs to you if you set up your own web host--which is certainly possible for a moderate entrepreneur outlay.

Or, y'know, the government can issue regulations saying that legal, constitutionally-protected speech must be hosted by tech companies who operate as content platforms.

As I pointed out, Bluehost is owned by Mormons, and they do what they want.

I will be vague on this. But I have professional experience relating to Bluehost. And not as a customer.

My experience has been that Bluehost admins are a joke. Bad comedy.

 

[RDKirk]

Yes, they do. Or they can at least be browbeaten. Some klan guy got his domain registration revoked a few years ago. I think the same thing just happened to 8chan as well.

We can also become domain registrars, as Bluehost is.

Or, y'know, the government can issue regulations saying that legal, constitutionally-protected speech must be hosted by tech companies who operate as content platforms.

That law has been passed and revoked already as a violation of the First Amendment. But that's government and has nothing to do with the discussion of this thread.

I will be vague on this. But I have professional experience relating to Bluehost. And not as a customer.

My experience has been that Bluehost admins are a joke. Bad comedy.

That has nothing to do with my point, unless you're contending that Christians are inherently poor tech-company managers and thus must depend on pagans to handle our technical needs.