Mike McCue Quotes

Now look: I love Twitter. But let's not kid ourselves; when it comes to a free and open Internet, Twitter is a part of the problem. The company has a viewpoint and uses that viewpoint to discriminate.

As Barbara Streisand discovered, adopting a militaristic posture against a tech-savvy mob of civil libertarians is not going to be of much help: Many of them run their own servers and blogs - and have thousands of friends on their social networks - so overzealous attempts to silence them only lead to wider dissemination of sensitive information.

Twitter can be incredibly valuable as an open communications mechanism, but if you close too many things down too quickly, if you think about it too short-sightedly, you could easily do a lot of damage to that ecosystem.

Facebook allows outsiders to add functionality to the site but reserves the right to change that policy at any time, to charge a fee for applications, or to de-emphasize or eliminate apps that court controversy or that they simply don't like.

I love the Internet, and I love that you can say whatever you want.

The key thing for us at Twitter is to recognize our role as the provider of this open platform for free expression ... to recognize that the speech is not our own.... We feel we have a duty to respect and to defend these voices on the platform. The platform of any debate is neutral. The platform doesn't take sides.

The Internet should be an open platform where you are free to go where you want and say and do what you want without having to ask anyone's permission.

The Internet is a free and open platform. Everyone has the right to speak. However, compliance with the law is the bottom line that no one should violate.

Information on the Internet must be as free as in the newspapers.

The Internet's distinct configuration may have facilitated anonymous threats, copyright infringement, and cyberattacks, but it has also kindled the flame of freedom in ways that the framers of the American constitution would appreciate - the Federalist papers were famously authored pseudonymously.

A generation of people are being radicalised by the criminalisation of information sharing.

Young Egyptians, gazing through the windows of the Internet, have gained a keener sense than many of their elders of the freedoms and opportunities they lack. They have found in social media a way to interact and share ideas, bypassing, in virtual space, the restrictions placed on physical freedom of assembly.

I'm not an absolutist about free speech. Intellectually, I believe that most of the time it's better to let things get said, argue them, and put lies and stupidities to rest. Practically, I know that newspapers rarely issue corrections with the same prominence they give to denouncements - and Twitter, by its nature, never does.

In Russia, they do not generally block the Internet and directly censor websites.

The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

The internet, Facebook and Twitter have created mass communications and social spaces that regimes cannot control.

I am not leaving twitter. If the mindless few defeat the thoughtful majority we are all doomed.

Both the American people and nations that censor the internet should understand that our government is committed to helping promote internet freedom.

Huge sums of money, administrative manipulation, have all been mustered to prevent the people from expressing their voice.

Technical standards can be designed either to foster openness or to permit censorship and surveillance. In short, the Internet, before it is physically constructed from routers and cables, is made up of values.

Either we, as a society, decide that copyright is the greater value to society, and take active steps to give up private communications as a concept. Either that, or we decide that the ability to communicate in private, without constant monitoring by authorities, has the greater value - in which case copyright will have to give way.

The Supreme Court has equated money with free speech.

Washington faces a simple choice: allow the Internet to remain as an engine of innovation, a platform for speech in even the harshest tyrannies, and a unified connection for people across the globe—or cede control of the Internet to service providers motivated by their parochial interests.

There are massive efforts on the part of the internet's corporate owners to try to direct it to become a technique of marginalisation and control.

I want to shine a spotlight on showing how dangerous Trump and his Twitter button can be.