8808
Comments (431)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
41
GlacialSpeed 41 points ago +43 / -2

Section 230 should not exist for any company that averages over X-million views by American each day.

That fixes the issue of small sites being impacted and fucks the large scale censorship machines.

*I don't know what the real number should be to achieve the desired results. Any marketing guys here have an idea?

32
deleted 32 points ago +33 / -1
49
Gunslinger1776 49 points ago +49 / -0

Everyone freaking out about 230 being terminated instead of reformed... <sips coffee>... this is how Trump opens a negotiation. He always overshoots with the expectation of meeting in the middle. This is the Art of the Deal.

18
deleted 18 points ago +18 / -0
3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
bigntazt 2 points ago +3 / -1

I think this site would be fine, we don't pretend to be a town square with open discussions. It's very clear. We are a Trump rally, get on board or gtfo.

Facebook and Twitter pretend being the towns bulletin board and regularly abuse 230 protections.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
1
TrumpsBigBalls 1 point ago +1 / -0

yeah but....it also gives us all the ability to sue the fuck out of them.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
1
kekNation 1 point ago +1 / -0

Scott Adams has entered the chat

1
rationalistone 1 point ago +1 / -0

If Trump is using nation security as a reason to do something, there will be no "Art of the Deal" involved. He will be using Presidential power to eliminate 230 or parts of it because it is a threat to national security (e.g. China has undue influence over Big Tech players, which is likely why they are waging information warfare on the American public).

1
LadyOfLorien 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oooh. I like. Underrated comment.

9
nointernetforyou 9 points ago +9 / -0

This is good.

8
Bottle_of_Memes 8 points ago +8 / -0

It's also the effect they have on the competition, similar to anti-trust. Twitter/FB/Youtube/Google are so big that it's virtually impossible to compete. When they decide to "deplatform" someone it affects that person's ability to speak because there are no comparable alternatives.