BrazzVuvuzela

> What people really mean when they talk about censorship is first amendment rights.

I don't agree. The snarky and smug "nuh uh, cuz it wasn't the government" responses [often maliciously] assume that complaints about censorship are talking about the first amendment, but I think people are generally aware that censorship can come from corporations too and their concerns are not limited to apparent violations of the first amendment specifically but are concerned with the more general principle of free speech (which predates the first amendment.)

I'd never trust it with any data I care about. HN doesn't even let you delete your account with post history.

So yes.

Another word for basically the same thing, yes. Excommunication is top-down directed shunning.

> I mean are they being forced to do it and not being paid for it

Slavery is forced labor, which is orthogonal to being paid. If you are forced to work but are also paid (perhaps rare, but not unheard of), you are still a slave regardless of the pay. If you aren't being paid but aren't being forced to work, you aren't a slave (that's called volunteering.)

"Do with them"? That's a truly chilling way to speak of people.

You're only feigning surprise.. right?

Correct, but Chomsky wanted people to believe it was lies.

If a body, then why not an egg?

It doesn't matter. YECs would say god created it to test them or the devil created it to trick them, it doesn't matter how precisely or imprecisely you word headlines about dinosaurs they still won't believe it. Stop worrying so much about whatever stupid things they think, you're not going to bring them to sanity around by being super pedantic.

Quantity has a quality all of it's own. Wiretaps against a specific individuals is a lot different than dragnets covering an entire nation.