i feel like this actually would violate the first amendmenthttps://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1416101387881046020 …
-
0:37 -
Replying to @DanielleFong
also, it can be a quite interesing debate to watch; “does giving out misinformation is a form of speech.” I am not sure that founding fathers meant dis/misinformation should be protected under the 1st. especially nowadays it is a form of social engineering…
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ManikDepresif
why wouldn’t information be a form of speech, mis or otherwise?
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @DanielleFong
if it is a tool for self-expression, sure. if it becomes a tool for manipulation. think about accusing someone without any evidence or proof, or better, declaring elections null without any proof… can/should we also consider as free-speech?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ManikDepresif
it’s demonstrably impractical today to determine which is which today, as we have seen throughout the pandemic; event the people warning about the virus were ban hammered from even this, one of the more lenient of platforms. to extend this to *every* platform is orwellian
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @DanielleFong
your point is; such tool can be exploited to oppress other voices, which is a legit concern. but just because we are too lazy/disorganized to find a solution, shouldn’t mean we have to legalize bullshit under the first, or love of guns under 2nd.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
current institutions cannot be entrusted with the drop of being the arbiters of the truth. we have to stop short of multiplatform banhammers
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
