zlacker

>>matthe+(OP)
This post came from this HN discussion earlier this week:

What if we made advertising illegal?

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43595269#43599667

>>matthe+f
We should outright forbid it in public space. IHMO.

Also I'd say lets only tax undesirable behaviour!

So not tax:

* wages

* having a house

* adding value (VAT)

But so tax:

* land use

* polluting

* packaging (could be part of polluting)

* accumulating profits at the top

This idea has some similarities to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgism

>>cies+Pd
> We should outright forbid [advertising] in public space. IHMO.

My cousin died to protect your right to say this. Ads are speech too.

>>Galati+cf
I think free speech is something to protect for humans, not for companies.

I can say "you should get the vaccine!" Companies that want to say these kinds of things have rules to abide by: and thanks fully so.

I'm much for free speech, but more in the sense that we should be able to discuss policy/politics/critique/bitch/bash/religions/etc. Not so we can make terror plans, defame, harass, bully and share child porn.

Not sure what happened to your cousin... But I'm curious now. Care to share?

>>cies+Tn
> I'm much for free speech, but more in the sense that we should be able to discuss policy/politics/critique/bitch/bash/religions/etc. Not so we can make terror plans, defame, harass, bully

The recent past should tell you that a lot of what some would call legitimate critique/bitch/bash etc. others would call harass/bully/violence –to also include not speaking about it at all.

So in the interest of consistency, and publicity, I'd prefer to let the bigots of the world speak, and out themselves as bigots, so that we may then publicly speak and make fun of them for being bigots. The same goes for corporations.