Yes I read that and hold that this decision is still highly political. Technically X can choose to simply not exist in Turkey. Obviously they won’t do this and Erdogan knows this, profit is king. This doesn’t change the fact that they are choosing to cow to threats by a dictator. Legal decisions are political and have political implications. Who do you think wrote those laws?
So you think that instead of complying while fighting the legal order and being able to tell users that what is happening, you think that they should pull the entire site from the country?
They aren’t “choosing to cow to threats by a dictator” - they are following the law, and fighting the legal order through the courts.
Come on mate lol. They’re doing the absolute most user and free speech friendly thing they can possibly do given the situation.
Question - what would you have done in this situation if you owned and ran X?
The employees of X, or any company for that matter. Businesses can only profit by extracting a portion of the value created by a laborer as value can only come from labor. This is exploitative because the laborer is by default put into a situation where they must sell their labor or starve and even still they only recieve a small percentage of the value they produce. This is effectively coercion at the threat of destitution.
Yes I read that and hold that this decision is still highly political. Technically X can choose to simply not exist in Turkey. Obviously they won’t do this and Erdogan knows this, profit is king. This doesn’t change the fact that they are choosing to cow to threats by a dictator. Legal decisions are political and have political implications. Who do you think wrote those laws?
So you think that instead of complying while fighting the legal order and being able to tell users that what is happening, you think that they should pull the entire site from the country?
They aren’t “choosing to cow to threats by a dictator” - they are following the law, and fighting the legal order through the courts.
Come on mate lol. They’re doing the absolute most user and free speech friendly thing they can possibly do given the situation.
Question - what would you have done in this situation if you owned and ran X?
I would never stoop so low as to exploit the labor of others
What?
I am well aware it isn’t a logical business decision, I just don’t care
I’m asking who’s labor is being exploited here?
The employees of X, or any company for that matter. Businesses can only profit by extracting a portion of the value created by a laborer as value can only come from labor. This is exploitative because the laborer is by default put into a situation where they must sell their labor or starve and even still they only recieve a small percentage of the value they produce. This is effectively coercion at the threat of destitution.
O………k…………
So absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, just ……… anything but communism is bad?
Yeah I made my point about the topic at hand but you kept asking questions so the topic changed