[rwiggum]

Free speech is free speech though. Either it's free or it's not free. You are arguing for "not free". I am not a fan of that ideology. This isn't shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre. This is restricting access to speech (code) simply because the gov doesn't approve of what the code does.

[clucas]

Let's say we, as a nation, through our elected representatives, decide to pass a law against trojans. Then let's say there's a site hosting a trojan repo, open to the public, and they refuse law enforcement's demands to remove access to the code. So the FBI goes through the court and gets a warrant to seize the site and prevents access to the code.

Would you stop the above chain of events at the very first link? Would you say: "We can't ban trojans because it's code, and code is speech, and speech is either free or its not?"

[DoctorOW]

> when platforms kick off the people we don't like

Is not a comment on free speech or not. There are rumors of government sanctions for this specific case, but the typical deplatforming is more like getting kicked out by the bouncer.