"Other states are high or low for various reasons: the outliers Maryland and Virginia, for example, both have dramatically higher Federal spending per capita than the average state, as they are near the physical headquarters for most of the Federal government and have significantly disproportionate Federal spending for procurement and Federal wages."
So, while Virginia is a relatively high-income state and contributes a lot of Federal income tax, they also have a lot of Federal employees, grants, contracts, etc.
Can you define what a "platform" is? And do you think there is a legal distinction between the two?
If this is regarding section 230, around which this dichotomy always seems to surface, then are you aware that the word "platform" does not appear in the text of said section?
Platform is user uploaded content with minimal censorship and where the platform has minimal responsibility over the content. Publisher is curated content with arbitrary censorship and heavy responsibility over the content.
As a voter, I'd expect to be able to use the platform/publisher spectrum to determine how much censorship a service should have. If a service has censorship capabilities different from what a large enough part of the population thinks they should have then the law should be changed to rectify this.
My questions to you (and anyone else):
Where does YouTube lie on this idealized platform/publisher perspective? How much censorship ability should they have? To what degree does your expectations of their censorship ability differ from their actual censorship ability according to the law?
Can you elaborate on how a "monopoly corporation" is like a branch of government? I don't understand your analogy, or what is special about a monopoly versus any other corporation with significant power, cultural or otherwise.
What does limited liability have to do with a corporation being owned by one person? I assume this poster is questioning the "giant corporation" part. Maybe you meant to say "any corporation"?
I also mistakenly thought the cake baker was a sole proprietor. They are incorporated. I should have done a simple search before posting my original comment.
That said, I now mostly agree with the comment I was originally replying to.
> What does limited liability have to do with a corporation being owned by one person?
Correct, nothing. To clarify:
My position is that an entity enjoying limited liability (which in the US includes an LLC or corporation owned by a single person) has exchanged "rights" for indemnity and therefore can be compelled to - for example - bake a cake or not censor content hosted on their servers, but that a sole proprietor can do whatever they want re: refusing service or moderating content.
"Other states are high or low for various reasons: the outliers Maryland and Virginia, for example, both have dramatically higher Federal spending per capita than the average state, as they are near the physical headquarters for most of the Federal government and have significantly disproportionate Federal spending for procurement and Federal wages."
So, while Virginia is a relatively high-income state and contributes a lot of Federal income tax, they also have a lot of Federal employees, grants, contracts, etc.
(I was surprised at first too)