Happens via, but starts with individuals (or should!).

What we have now is the worst of both worlds:

- Individual speech is censored at whim by non-government platforms that are unavoidable.

- While giant companies are empowered to speak anything they want (speaking as the company).

That doesn't seem ass-backwards?

We should be prioritizing individual speech / power, and disempowering corporate speech.

Non-government platforms that are "unavoidable," except that most people successfully avoid them?

Says who? Even the aspiring indie filmmaker wants limited liability not unlimited liability.

That's backwards reasoning though.

If limited liability is a concern... we can just create that for individuals.

I'm not convinced that Meta also needs the right to do whatever it wants, for the sake of aspiring indie filmmakers.

"If limited liability is a concern... we can just create that for individuals."

> laughs in lawyer

what if two people want to make a movie together?

Then we create some kind of liability for that situation. And then we figure out at what assemblage scale multiple people stop being a collection of individuals and start being something fundamentally different.

LLC et al. liability didn't just exist in a tablet given to humanity from god.

It was designed for a purpose, and we could design the same thing for people if we wanted, instead of granting legal corporations individuals' rights.