I don't see it that way. It's their platform, it's their right to do any kind of censorship that they want.

Well, with your approach we got US healthcare :-) LOL

No, idea that your internet provider has the right to get the axe and cut every cable around just because he forgot to get his Prozac is quite attractive, but stupid.

Idea that you can set your own crazy rules also better match some small medieval settlement, and even in this case very far from reality.

The essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In reality, it is the ensemble of the social relations.

I suggest to go to nearest tattoo and put this into some highly visible place.

It is very interesting how individualism, core thing of ideology of your enemies became part of you. You don't need to protect the beast, you need to go and prepare your knife, as it is time for a dinner with his head on main plate.

I don't understand why the owner of the free service shouldn't say I don't want that here.

Because your approach has huge flaw you do not see.

If you live in medieval settlement and one of the shoemakers just do not want to see you - you will be pretty ok. Unfortunately even in medieval time it was rare to have such choice.

In modern times almost every big service or manufactures is huge social structure close to monopoly. If you will be personally banned by Google, Paypal or alike you will survive but you will take serious hit and if your small business had been based on such service it'll tank.

I don't understand what US healthcare (yes I know is shit) and internet providers (which can also be shit) have to do with it. You pay for both of them and they still screw you over.

It has all to do with it, as it is build on your ideology - let insurance companies and medics rip ill people and let the strongest survive. Ones who chose doctor wrong or applied to wrong insurance plan must be eliminated.

Some not as much, I have move from provider to provider until I found one that screws me less.

It is kind of nuts. I mean here to build 4-5 doubling lines and include the costs into service bill to allow you to choose best instead of do all properly one time. In reality, btw you have one or at best two alternatives and both usually are almost same.

YouTube is a free service, you don't have to put videos on it if you feel they are gonna censor you. Besides making lots of money from it, people are not paying them to put their videos on there.

It is same individualism approach. Youtube is huge service, and it is NOT free. As Youtube buy the video content (sometimes for free, other times for part of ads revenue) and resell it to audience via advertisments (viewer actually pay using his life time to watch ads).

Somehow you get the issue that will happen if you will be banned from walking or driving on any roads. But do not get that it is same common large infrastructure created by huge number of people.

What people should be outraged at is the level of censorship governments around the world impose on it's citizens. Should a private company stand up against things like that? Absolutely yes. At the end of day, the government still has the upper hand with any regulations that they wanna impose.

So, government is some kind of separate entity who is.... bad. And because it is bad it want censorship. Well, bullshit.

Government is just lot of managers who are hired by means of productions owners (capitalists) and who just manage their common fund (called state budget). So, government make sure to implement measures in the interests of ruling class. Same as private companies are doing, just they put their own interest first. But their core interests almost always match fully.

Both government and Google want to use fake "terrorism", pedophiles and another horror stories to implement technical and human system to fight and hunt down their real opponents. They just can't openly say that their enemies are not some horrible criminals that they like to show you, but all hard working people around.

Hopefully this will open doors for a new company to start up with zero censorship until when they have become "too big to fail".

I am so surprised how naïve you are.

As far as I know, youTube is free to me. YouTube has never charge me money for posting my video to their site. They have made money from the videos I put, but youTube never had a gun to my head that I have to post videos online. If I don't want google to make money from what I posted, then maybe I should think of not posting videos on it.

It is same as asking seller of potato not go to the market and sell it at the nearest corn field. I provided you another sample with roads.

I tell you that few managers and owners do not have any rights to own or set any rules in big social structures that any modern manufacturing or service is. And that they do it only because of regressive social structure were small group is imposing their values and moral that are a opposite to interests of all other people.

Please don't try to tell me that real bad people are not using services like google and payal to promote their hate. If you don't want such people to be taken out of it then I don't know why we are even talking about this. If google or paypal ban someone because they are actually connected with terrorism, wait what's wrong with that?

I think lot of stupid people are using services to promote values that they see on TV, hear around and read. They promote individualism and competition. Just in the form you do not like.

Same as religion is natural to class society as escape path from real nightmares. Same is hate, nationalism and idiotism are natural.

So idea to fight with extremists banning them is just idiotism. And you must openly say it instead of support it. As the only real way to fight real extremists is banning capitalism :-)

If I choose someday to get into government and when I get there I change and start working for corporations(like in most cases) instead of the people I promise to go represent, then you should be outrage about that. That's where the outrage should be.

As you do not use scientific class based approach you start writing such things. About politicians not working for people. This is that I mean under naïve.

"It'll be all aimed to anyone who won't be liked by ruling class." No more cat videos for you, Vitaliy. (Apologies to Sienfeld)