Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Yes, I agree.

A hypothetical bar owner could get away with banning silly hats. We can defend that with assertions about ownership of property and the privileges that gives somebody... that isn't particularly problematic within reason. Governments though? They need to play by a different, stricter, set of rules. "Ownership of infrastructure" should not be accepted as a defense of a government banning silly hats on their sidewalks.

Governments operate in a privileged space where they are permitted to do many things that individuals and companies are not allowed to do (as a quick example, they can levying taxes against the general population). That has to come at a cost though; they aren't allowed to do things that individuals and companies are permitted to do (as a quick US-centric example, they cannot endorse and support a particular religion).

For this reason, comparisons and analogies between what governments and individuals/companies can do are very frequently worthless at best. These sort of comparisons are just unavoidably apples and oranges.




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: