Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the so-you-say dept
This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is That One Guy with our response to the latest bogus op-ed about Section 230:
When your job requires you to be a liar, that's not a good look
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” ― Upton Sinclair
And the streak remains unbroken, the only way to attack 230 is to lie about it.
I wish the liars in question would come up with some new material already though rather than the same long-debunks garbage, I mean when your arguments don't have to be based upon reality then spice things up, go wild, not like it'll make your arguments worse or anything.
'230 causes cancer in babies!'
'230 makes puppies bonk their noses on hard objects!'
'230 is the reason you sometimes feel the need to sneeze but it refuses to come out and you just end up feeling uncomfortable and making a weird face!'
In second place, it's an anonymous response to questions about whether it's better when Trump appoints someone terrible to an important job, or when he appoints nobody at all:
That's why Candeub was previously an acting director, which is another method favored by Trump. Appoint an acting-something, and no confirmations! All the win.
But appointing no one at all is less bad than appointing these utter fuckwits.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start with a response from sumgai to that same post about Trump's appointment of a Section 230-hater to a top DOJ role:
Actually, since Senate confirmation is not necessary, Biden can replace him at will. The basic reason would be lack of desired qualifications, and the underlying threat would be "gross abuse of power in attempting to subvert a news media outlet's 1A rights", something that might carry a penalty heavier than simply no longer working in a government position. This threat should be enough to assure a quiet resignation, but sadly, at this point no one can be sure about such things.
Next, it's :Lobo Santo summing up one of the key goals at play among those trying to change online content rules:
Let us think for a moment on last century's media paradigm:
A first-class lane for content "streamed" in full-color to the home--cable tv
and a second-class lane for people to use to contact their equals and "betters"--telephone.Now, contrast with the internet: Everybody has a voice.
Any citizen can speak out on any available platform and be seen by very nearly the entirely world. Or at least, a majority of our countrymen.
In this context, let us ask again, why would politicians (or those behind them) want to put an end to Section 230 for the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?
To quote Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality: "To understand the object of an obscure plot, observe its consequences and ask who might have intended them."
In my opinion, somebody is playing a long game in an attempt to return to the status quo of the few having the power to broadcast, and the many having only what little they are allowed.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is an anonymous response to complaints about Silicon Valley censorship in the aforementioned anti-230 op-ed in USA Today:
I have just one question...
How did this screed get through the "independent thought" gatekeeping? The Lords of Silicon Valley have some explaining to do!
In second place, it's Pixelation with a response to Trump's "maga2020" password on his Twitter account:
He'll change it to...
IWon2020!
For editor's choice on the funny side, we start out with Eric wondering why the government is worried about another dumb password that compromised the security of Solarwinds:
I mean its just a "backdoor", what's the big deal?
Finally, it's David with a response to another commenter telling the story of how they got a copyright claim on YouTube over a recording of insects outside their window:
Well, what do you expect when uploading a soundtrack from the beetles?
That's all for this week, folks!
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
'230 spreads 5G !!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Disappointed.
No, I'm not disappointed that I didn't get a nod (I mean, I usually don't).
I'm disappointed that Dr. Sebastian "Little Scale" Tomczak didn't chime in on the post about his 10-hour white noise youtube vid getting dinged for © infringement. Why? Because he's a facebook friend of mine and I specifically put him up to the TechDirt post in question.
Sad!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
While I have not seen any evidence to suggest honesty has any strong correlation to intellect, there is good reason to believe most people attacking CDA230 are mentally deficient. I mean most of the arguments I have seen against CDA230 are self defeating (removing 230 makes the problems complained about worse, not better).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"To understand the object of an obscure plot, observe its consequences and ask who might have intended them."
Not intended, reversed.
They want control back.
The internet is like the small town news, Wait 5 min and you know everything going on, IF you want to.
How much money does a news paper Earn from having abit of News?
How much does cable(not Local broadcast) earn?
How much money do the BIG news agencies SPEND sending correspondents Around the world?
How many news papers would you need to read to Catch up on Everything?
How many cable channels tell you JUST the news? not opinions.
General wandering around the net, can get you allot of info, but also gets you International news in an instant, you get Both sides, and every side of the problem.
Something I heard in a video about the OPINION of other nations. The USA calls leaders nations that are Socialist, Dictators. Esp when they are in Central and south America. But never in the EU.
Wouldnt it be easy to get Local news from the other nations from Their OWN broadcasts? Or is that 1 side, and NOT OURS?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Disappointed.
Too bad, i am sure he would have some additional interesting things to say about it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Really? Wow, I'm already starting to question my support of section 230!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Politicians get donations from big media company's riaa TV film mega corporations like Disney Sony AT&T ETC
The gatekeepers maybe they want to go back to the 90s when
ARTISTS Had to give up thier ip to get a record contract
With section 230 gone it. ll be harder for startups or sound loud band amp to compete if you want to release a video you may only have YouTube or Facebook or cbsnbc Disney to go to
Big company's get stronger small Web forums may shut down or be faced with expensive lawsuits cos a random user posted
a short video clip without getting permission first from a ip owner
Also politicians maybe be stupid they think section 230 is just for Google Facebook
It's also used by every newspaper or local TV station that has a
Website
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Those entities, like online shops have a website and online business even if they allow no user comments or reviews. YouTube, Jamendo, Reddit, Stack Exchange etc. only have a web site and business if they allow user content; except maybe YouTube could become another Netflix.
[ link to this | view in thread ]