zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. gibbit+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-04-05 18:30:25
Someone else made the point that ads cost money, so this isn't about free speech. I guess making advertising free would be the same as banning it since it exists to be sold.
replies(1): >>bofade+32
2. bofade+32[view] [source] 2025-04-05 18:41:17
>>gibbit+(OP)
Any voluntary transaction between two conscious, consenting adults is axiomatically ethical and moral.
replies(1): >>nehal3+4u1
◧◩
3. nehal3+4u1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-06 13:22:08
>>bofade+32
Following your axiom would imply advertisers would need to gain my consent in order to advertise to me. That would be a decent start.
replies(1): >>bofade+ip2
◧◩◪
4. bofade+ip2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-06 20:44:08
>>nehal3+4u1
No that's not a transaction. We're talking about contracts. Derp.
replies(1): >>nehal3+jC2
◧◩◪◨
5. nehal3+jC2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-06 22:45:03
>>bofade+ip2
If you follow Merriam Webster for 'transaction' it absolutely is: "a communicative action or activity involving two parties or things that reciprocally affect or influence each other"
replies(1): >>bofade+aX2
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. bofade+aX2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-04-07 02:15:06
>>nehal3+jC2
Alright, noted. I'm not writing a law to be interpreted - it's a comment.
[go to top]