Posted on 01/08/2021 5:53:56 AM PST by littleharbour
Now that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc., have made it clear they will deny access to their social media monopolies because of personal political beliefs, what will stop the phone/internet companies from denying access to basic phone, internet and cell service. This would result in the shutdown of Free Republic, Parler, OANN, RSBN, Newsmax, etc. And what would stop the banks and mortgage companies from denying access to their services?
With no means of collective communication, and imposition of severe financial consequences on individuals, how would it be possible to have any form of resistance against the media/uniparty/big tech/big corporate/deep state dictatorship?
This may not all happen tomorrow, but this is exactly what the leftists want. And the shutting down of the President's social media links proves that it is possible. Comments welcome.
“Shortwave radio.”
FYI
BaoFeng BF-F8HP (UV-5R 3rd Gen) 8-Watt Dual Band Two-Way Radio (136-174MHz VHF & 400-520MHz UHF) Includes Full Kit with Large Battery - $62 (free shipping)
https://baofengtech.com/product/bf-f8hp/
Do not buy from Amazon. More expensive at Amazon.
Pass a law dropping their pay rates to minimum wage. They will leave very quickly. And don't worry about what the constitution says. Nobody pays attention to that anymore.
The BF is the go to, chirps reprogrammed, and flexible antennas along with a book on how to string up wire to run different freq. ranges.
Ty
Respects
Phone companies are still regulated as an utility I believe
————————————
Facebook and Twitter are utilities as well. And we all know how they suppress freedom of speech. I have long maintained that if Facebook and Twitter are allowed to censor our lives, it won’t be long before your phone company will do the same. Before your electric company will cut you off. Before your insurance will cancel your policy. Before the state allows all private companies and Utilities to trample over our rights and our freedom‘s.
Yes. Good suggestion
Btw
Love the tag you have... Lol
Hacking into other Internet accounts, VPN services..lots of ways around this. However, the Chinese seem to have perfected Internet censorship and I am certain their technology will be used here soon enough
And no doubt the ChiComs have perfected this Big Brother system with the participation of the American Big Tech giants. Traitors all.
At this time neither Facebook nor Twitter are utilities.
Incorrect. They are what is now known as e-utilities.
They are monopolies that every day ordinary Americans use in a normal course of daily life. They are a standard form of communication to freely express any and all of our constitutional freedoms.
For our government to allow these companies to limit our freedom of speech is unconstitutional.
So was what they just did to our elections.
Never underestimate the ability of the left to rationalize suppressing conservatives, and the willingness of corporate American to accommodate what the left wants done.
You forgot denied health care, debit cards denied, no fly list, and food rationed.
Easy Peezy.
I have a couple of cups and some string. That should do it.
Only a matter of time...
IAC, will never be a continuing problem... Most Conservatives will be long gone (purged) from this earth before the Harris-Pelousy administration ends in 2040...
I understand your concerns, but the law always trails changes. This is why it took about 14 years to pass the Clayton Antitrust Act.
Such a law should be passed. Last year even Elizabeth Warren was supporting it.
Such a law should be passed. Last year even Elizabeth Warren was supporting it.
There are folks who work in library administration who are staunchly anti-censorship. My wife is one of them. Most actual librarians want no part of any of this.
But they could be replaced, union protections or not.
With the actions Google, Facebook, Twitter and now Apple are taking I support you 100%. Too bad 230 exists, this needs to be changed.
I did not think they were , but regardless, such have Terms of Use type agreements we signify consent to even if we have not read it (but we must say we have, though I mean part of it), concerning which Openurmind wrote
make available any content that is harmful to children, threatening, abusive...defamatory, hateful, or racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable;
And indeed, commercial communication companies like Google, Verizon and Comcast actually state in their ToS that certain forms of speech are prohibited. For example, Verizon's Acceptable Use Policy states in part,
1. General Policy: Verizon reserves the sole discretion to deny or restrict your Service, or immediately to suspend or terminate your Service, if the use of your Service by you or anyone using it, in our sole discretion, ...is objectionable...or violates the terms of this Acceptable Use Policy (“AUP”). Is so broad and subjectively defined that it can cover all sorts of otherwise protected speech. It used to say, "Verizon reserves the right to deny Service to you, or immediately to terminate your Service for material breach, if your use... promotes or incites bigotry, hatred or racism; (c) might be legally actionable for any reason, (d) is objectionable for any reason...
And Comporium Communications, like the rest, has a SERVICE AGREEMENT in which it states, Objectionable content. Using our services to post, transmit or disseminate any content that is, in our opinion, abusive, libelous, slanderous, defamatory, incites hatred or is otherwise offensive or objectionable.
Likewise, Comcast Cloud Solutions Terms of Service (for businesses) states, in part,
BY USING THE CLOUD SOLUTIONS MARKETPLACE YOU AGREE NOT TO post, upload, or distribute any User Submission (as defined in Section 8 below) or other content that is defamatory....inaccurate... or that a reasonable person could deem to be objectionable, offensive,...threatening, embarrassing, distressing, vulgar, hateful, racially or ethnically offensive, or otherwise inappropriate.
And as usual with these terms of service consents, this contains some ambiguous language( that would allow broad censorship (cf. content that is offensive or objectionable) which can be interpreted to place FR in violation, and you/us as users, now or in the future.
And note Cloudflare's policy which is, as stated vby CEO Matthew Prince, "One of the greatest strengths of the United States is a belief that speech, particularly political speech, is sacred. A website, of course, is nothing but speech ... A website is speech. It is not a bomb. There is no imminent danger it creates and no provider has an affirmative obligation to monitor and make determinations about the theoretically harmful nature of speech a site may contain."
For all customers Cloudflare offers an "I'm Under Attack Mode" setting. Cloudflare claims this can mitigate advanced Layer 7 attacks by presenting a JavaScript computational challenge which must be completed by a user's browser before the user can access a website - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloudflare
But who dropped the American neo-Nazi website "The Daily Stormer" as a customer. Which I would do also, but as said, if a host can deny such based on its content being objectionable, it can deny conservative content on the same basis (unless perhaps the one denied wanted to promote the homosexual agenda or reverse racism.). This issue led to this opinion piece in the NYT no less, The Terrifying Power of Internet Censors :
Generally speaking, there are two kinds of corporate players on the internet: companies that build infrastructure through which content flows, and companies that seek to curate content and create a community.
Internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast, domain name servers, web hosts and security services providers like Cloudflare are all the former — or the “pipe.” They typically don’t look at the content their clients and customers are putting up, they just give them the means to do it and let it flow.
Social media platforms like Facebook are the latter. They encourage their users to create, share and engage with content — so they look at content all the time and decide whether they want to allow hateful material like that of neo-Nazis to stay up.
One of the additional difficulties with Cloudflare is that it is not so much a piece of pipe as it is a service. Specifically, it is a paid-for-protection service. Having to hire Cloudflare to protect your website is like having to hire security to protect you from attackers when you speak in the public square.
Matthew Prince, Cloudflare’s chief executive, acknowledged how much power his company has, and what’s at stake. “The internet is a really important resource for everyone,” he said in an interview with TechCrunch, “but there’s a very limited set of companies that control it and there’s such little accountability to us that it really is quite a dangerous thing.” - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/13/opinion/cloudflare-daily-stormer-charlottesville.html
Utilities are not allowed to discriminate between customers – every customer is entitled to service on equal terms.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.