Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's a consistent position. And not one that I share completely since I can see instances where a business has to be regulated consumer protection, national security to name a few instances that readily spring to mind. I do think such a thing should only be applicable with a very decent justification rooted in law.It is interesting that a party that has a self-proclaimed aversion to regulation and equates any intervention in business as Communism has no problem taking what amount to ownership rights away from private businesses in this case.
Not everybody in their party. I'm against it because I don't like government getting over involved in business to start with no matter who it favors.
yes ATT is and Facebook is too and should be regulated as suchThat's why as an example of a common carrier, struth referrenced AT&T, not Facebook.ATT is a common carrier. Facebook is not.For the same reason AT&T can not.Why not? It’s their website.They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.
So no, not the same reason.
The act gives unusual protections to politicians. It doesn't really give much to the individual that they didn't previously have. Everybody has had recourse to the courts.Giving individuals recourse via the Courts forces social media to be honest in their practices so individuals are not deceptively propagandized, which we can assume would be against their will (I don't know of anyone who would willfully allow themselves to be indoctrinated without full disclosure).
Clarence Thomas for another.The definition of common carrier, for one.Who claims a "platform" isn't a common carrier?
So answer the question then.... how much does it cost to post on Facebook?yes ATT is and Facebook is too and should be regulated as suchThat's why as an example of a common carrier, struth referrenced AT&T, not Facebook.ATT is a common carrier. Facebook is not.For the same reason AT&T can not.Why not? It’s their website.They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.
So no, not the same reason.
LOLOL
You're a special kind of stupid to think an app has to be on a phone in order for a social media site to operate. Even dumber, you must think the Google playstore is the only way to get an app on a phone.
Denying the obvious is what fascists and racists do. I'm not interested in bickering with your bull shit. It's clear what they did and the effect of that, sugar boy
Spits the flaming imbecile who thinks it's Parlor. It's not, it's Parler; thinks Google shut them down. Google didn't shut them down, Amazon did. Thinks Parler couldn't operate when Google removed Parler's app from their playstore. Parler was still operating until Amazon shut them down.
You basically got every single aspect of this wrong. You should be more respectful to your betters who are trying to educate you.
I believe consumer protection laws would require facebook give somebody a full refund, if they get improperly banned.So answer the question then.... how much does it cost to post on Facebook?
So answer the question then.... how much does it cost to post on Facebook?yes ATT is and Facebook is too and should be regulated as suchThat's why as an example of a common carrier, struth referrenced AT&T, not Facebook.ATT is a common carrier. Facebook is not.For the same reason AT&T can not.Why not? It’s their website.They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.
So no, not the same reason.
Pettifogging, like you did above and you always do, does nothing to further your arguments. In fact, it weakens your position because you appear to lack credibility and appear to deflect or redirect, but whatever. You're a fucking asshole, so who cares.LOLOLLOLOLLOLLOLOLThat didn't shut Parler down, you fucking imbecile.LOLOLYou mean like some are only silenced on Twitter or Facebook?Exchange of ideas like football players kneeling during the National Anthem? How did the right like that exchange of ideas?it’s not even about free markets. Free markets welcome the exchange of ideas, not censorship.
Democrats running around screaming free markets! Free markets! Just unbelievable. Literally, as if they care about free markets.
They are just cheering because it's working, Republicans are being silenced.
And dblack doesn't see a problem
with that said, facebook is free in a free society to publish the content they want...with that said they should therefore be treated the same as everyone else in that business
The football players were only silenced AT WORK. No one silenced them other than that. Or proposed it.
Be more specific about the political protests you do at work
And ... Parlor ... Who was shut down by Google, not even their competitor. It's a clear anti-trust violation.
But you're here because you support free markets!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sure, that's what you care about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Parler was not shut down by Google. Who knows why you keep repeating that kaz?
MSN
www.msn.com
Right, a social media site just had to operate without being on phones. That's all.
OMG you're stupid. You aren't faking, you believe the propaganda. At least Goebbels knew it was propaganda
Faun is stupid, stupid is Faun ...
Dumbfuck, until Amazon took them down,, Parler was still accessible on phones. Just like USMB is.
You're a fucking retard.
Rumpelstiltskin! Can you freak out again now?
Remember I told you to talk to your mom about monitoring your sugar intake? Never mind, don't, it's too funny
Hisses the flaming imbecile who thinks apps don't run on phones if they're not in Google's playstore.
Never said that. No one said that but you. You're just OD'ing on sugar. I know you like the sugar high, but is the rebound worth it?
Kazzing won't erase your idiotic post. You said that here...
MSN
www.msn.com
Right, a social media site just had to operate without being on phones. That's all.
You're a special kind of stupid to think an app has to be on a phone in order for a social media site to operate. Even dumber, you must think the Google playstore is the only way to get an app on a phone.
Denying the obvious is what fascists and racists do. I'm not interested in bickering with your bull shit. It's clear what they did and the effect of that, sugar boy
Spits the flaming imbecile who thinks it's Parlor. It's not, it's Parler; thinks Google shut them down. Google didn't shut them down, Amazon did. Thinks Parler couldn't operate when Google removed Parler's app from their playstore. Parler was still operating until Amazon shut them down.
You basically got every single aspect of this wrong. You should be more respectful to your betters who are trying to educate you.
Poor kaz, even he knows he's been owned in the Florida Gov. DeSantis thread.LOLOL
You're a special kind of stupid to think an app has to be on a phone in order for a social media site to operate. Even dumber, you must think the Google playstore is the only way to get an app on a phone.
Denying the obvious is what fascists and racists do. I'm not interested in bickering with your bull shit. It's clear what they did and the effect of that, sugar boy
Spits the flaming imbecile who thinks it's Parlor. It's not, it's Parler; thinks Google shut them down. Google didn't shut them down, Amazon did. Thinks Parler couldn't operate when Google removed Parler's app from their playstore. Parler was still operating until Amazon shut them down.
You basically got every single aspect of this wrong. You should be more respectful to your betters who are trying to educate you.
Your argument is just no it's not. It's a stupid argument, you're just a racist
What's less than 0.01¢?I believe consumer protection laws would require facebook give somebody a full refund, if they get improperly banned.So answer the question then.... how much does it cost to post on Facebook?
And triple damages if it was intentional.
So how much does that come to?
Poor kaz, even he knows he's been owned in the Florida Gov. DeSantis thread.LOLOL
You're a special kind of stupid to think an app has to be on a phone in order for a social media site to operate. Even dumber, you must think the Google playstore is the only way to get an app on a phone.
Denying the obvious is what fascists and racists do. I'm not interested in bickering with your bull shit. It's clear what they did and the effect of that, sugar boy
Spits the flaming imbecile who thinks it's Parlor. It's not, it's Parler; thinks Google shut them down. Google didn't shut them down, Amazon did. Thinks Parler couldn't operate when Google removed Parler's app from their playstore. Parler was still operating until Amazon shut them down.
You basically got every single aspect of this wrong. You should be more respectful to your betters who are trying to educate you.
Your argument is just no it's not. It's a stupid argument, you're just a racist
Samsung will stop trading with Huawei on September 15thHere you are pettifogging while admitting that Big Tech breaching contracts and shut down Parler for purely political reasons and underlying hatred for open discourse, and you have no problem with that. We are not laughing with you. We are laughing AT you.
Not my soul. I don't post on Facebook.So answer the question then.... how much does it cost to post on Facebook?yes ATT is and Facebook is too and should be regulated as suchThat's why as an example of a common carrier, struth referrenced AT&T, not Facebook.ATT is a common carrier. Facebook is not.For the same reason AT&T can not.Why not? It’s their website.They can't discriminate based on idelogy alone, nor should they be allowed to.
So no, not the same reason.
Your soul
LOLOLPoor kaz, even he knows he's been owned in the Florida Gov. DeSantis thread.LOLOL
You're a special kind of stupid to think an app has to be on a phone in order for a social media site to operate. Even dumber, you must think the Google playstore is the only way to get an app on a phone.
Denying the obvious is what fascists and racists do. I'm not interested in bickering with your bull shit. It's clear what they did and the effect of that, sugar boy
Spits the flaming imbecile who thinks it's Parlor. It's not, it's Parler; thinks Google shut them down. Google didn't shut them down, Amazon did. Thinks Parler couldn't operate when Google removed Parler's app from their playstore. Parler was still operating until Amazon shut them down.
You basically got every single aspect of this wrong. You should be more respectful to your betters who are trying to educate you.
Your argument is just no it's not. It's a stupid argument, you're just a racist
Another of your gay pics, huh?
Social media platforms are private property. You play by their rules or you don’t play at all.Right? Who da fuk needs a voice anyway (except you and big tech) ?!?!?!
Why is that so hard to understand?
Yeah...it'd be nice if that's all they wanted.
Meh...it's not. They want all opposition silenced. Why do you think they kicked Parler off the servers?
Why do you think they are trying to indict Trump?
Why is Fascism so hard for you to understand?
It's like the person who tells the psychiatrist that all the ink blots look like people having sex.LOLOL
That looks gay to you??
I think you have gay emblazoned on your brain.
You asked what trade laws were for. I replied.“Trade or commerce” means the advertising, soliciting, providing, offering, or distributing, whether by sale, rental, or otherwise, of any good or service, or any property,
Again, Standard Oil was dissolved in 1911. Why do you keep bringing up the Clayton act?It doesn't even mention vertical integration, dumbass.
Vertical integration through a merger is subject to the provisions laid out in the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which governs transactions that fall under the umbrella of antitrust law. The Act provides substance and clarification to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890.
It doesn't mention vertical integration.? (read intense sarcasm here)
You have the reading skills of a moron.
Do you ever stop lying?The act gives unusual protections to politicians. It doesn't really give much to the individual that they didn't previously have. Everybody has had recourse to the courts.Giving individuals recourse via the Courts forces social media to be honest in their practices so individuals are not deceptively propagandized, which we can assume would be against their will (I don't know of anyone who would willfully allow themselves to be indoctrinated without full disclosure).
