zlacker

>>feross+(OP)
The article completely misses the point. Some middlemen like Twitter or Facebook does not want to be associated with certain images or point of view, perhaps because of advertising or user demographics or whatever reason, and they decide which content is ok or not. Both sender and receiver can want to have Trump tweets, but Twitter will not want that so they block it.

I don’t think Twitter is wrong, and it is not really different from Apple not letting pornography into the App Store, but it is still deeply troubling to me at some level. And it is neither moderation like discussed in the article or censorship as discussed in the article.

>>kmonse+hs
Right. Multi-billion dollar companies need to stop pretending they care about freedom of speech or user comfort. They care about money. What threatens their bottom line isn't allowed on their platform, fullstop. If that's ethnic slurs in the EU, they'll remove that. If it's pictures of a gay wedding in Saudi Arabia, they'll remove that.

>>causi+sv
I mean kind of, depending a bit what the mob get enraged over and they will do whatever to make the issue goes away ASAP.

More importantly I guess your main point is multi-billion dollar company mostly cares about money. To which I would say sure, what else is new? But maybe this is news to some people.