X is suing California over social media content moderation law::X, the social media company previously known as Twitter, is suing the state of California over a law that requires companies to disclose details about their content moderation practices.

  • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    What is precisely unlimited about this? Should companies be able to keep whatever they want behind the curtain and we aren’t allowed to ask what it is?

    • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      You said that government business is whatever the government passes laws about, which literally gives the government unlimited justification to do anything and everything because, by definition, it’s the proper business of government under that standard.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s the job of the government to inspect and regulate businesses and this is a reasonable and frankly way overdue example of them doing exactly that. Nothing unreasonable about it and calling it unlimited intrusion or whatever makes you look like the dumbest of libertarians, which is REALLY saying something.

        • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          No, it isn’t the purpose of government to just make demands of private businesses. It’s absolutely unreasonable for the government to do so with intent to censor

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            None of that is true. Go away if you the only thing you have to contribute is libertarian lies about basic accountability being tyranny.

            • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lmao why should I go away just because you have nothing except outright lies to defend your demands to terminate basic rights.

              • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                why should I go away

                Because you have nothing but lies and misunderstandings of basic facts to contribute, neither of which are beneficial to anyone.

                because you have nothing except outright lies

                Going for the gold medal in projection?

                demands to terminate basic rights

                There’s no basic right to facilitate stochastic terrorism.

                • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The fact the you bring up shit like “stochastic terrorism” just proves my point. I see no further reason to engage since you’re clearly off the deep end

              • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                How does asking to see how they moderate their content behind closed doors terminating basic rights? Can you describe which right they’re terminating here?