Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

It will be interesting to see how this plays out over time.

In this case, the Supreme Court made it clear that governments cannot prevent people from using social media. However other Supreme Court decisions have it that property owners don't have to allow others to use their property for speech, except in unusual cases like company towns.

It's not obvious to me that they will find these two ideas to be in conflict.




They might not. Then again, aren't Twitter and Facebook essentially company towns in the online world? If they are so ubiquitous that you must join these platforms to participate in modern political debate, that seems pretty darn close to qualifying.


These platforms have became a sort of super states with citizens from all around the world. A single nation's definition of what is acceptable or not is hard to apply to the platform as a whole.


Does it need to be applied to the platform as a whole? I imagine they already target content based on geolocating the IP requesting the content. Even the ad tier status can be geo-specific.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: