Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the the-hum-of-conversation dept
This week, our first place winner on the insightful side is That One Guy with a response to Josh Hawley's politically-motivated call to break up companies:
'Only companies I agree with deserve rights!'
I am shocked that insurrectionist Hawley is an enemy of the first amendment as well, why it's getting to the point that I'm starting to suspect that he thinks the law's entire purpose is to serve him rather than the public in general, much like his Dear Leader did and does.
Much like the MLB stunt even those that are in favor of 'reigning in' companies like Google and Facebook should be seriously angry at this stunt, because by saying the silent part out loud('I'm going after them because I don't like how they're using their actual rights!') he just made it much harder to take any real action against those companies as you can be damn sure that they will be raising the question of motives and unconstitutional retribution against any attempt to go after them after this.
The funny thing about that quote of his is if you take out the bullhorns(because they're certainly not dogwhistles) and swap out 'Big Tech' for 'telecom' then he might actually have had a point, as they are coddled by politicians and do use their power to squash competitors to keep their position, but funnily enough the politicians screaming about how much power the likes of Facebook and Google have tend to utter nary a peep when it comes to Comcast and AT&T.
In second place, it's Nathan F with a response to Derek Chauvin's conviction:
This incident is why cops try so very hard to keep the public from filming incidents, why riot police go after journalists, and don't turn their body cameras on. They don't want to be held accountable for their actions.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start out with a comment from PaulT responding to a defense of the Chicago cop who killed 13-year-old Adam Toldeo:
"When the police talk about "split second decisions" sometimes they're right"
The problem isn't the "split second decision" as such, it's the regularity in which the inability to de-escalate situations makes them necessary. Also, the fact that cops in the US are trained to bark conflicting orders so that no matter what action the target makes they can be deemed as disobeying orders and can thus be executed.
Bear in mind also that there was someone else who had to make a split second decision - the kid who was murdered. One party was a supposedly highly trained peace keeping force, the other was a scared 13 year old. Yet, it seems the latter was the one who reacted in the correct way, but died for it.
"Did the kid have the gun or was it planted later behind the fence as justification? Not obvious from the video."
I've seen footage that shows that the kid did indeed have a gun previously. But, that's not the point. He was ordered to drop his weapon and raise his arms, then he was shot anyway after he did exactly what was asked of him.
Next, it's another comment from That One Guy , this time about Apple's claims that the word "buy" isn't confusing to customers who are only getting a license:
'People would never think that words mean what they mean.'
If you buy a physical CD then you can give it to someone else, you can sell it, and the store most certainly is not allowed to come to your house after the fact and take it back, so if a company wants to use the 'Buy' label then they should be forced to treat the transaction as a purchase, and conversely if they want to treat it as a license then they should be required to use that label.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is an anonymous comment responding to ongoing nonsense complaints about our spam filter:
"I keep spamming comments and getting blocked for spam, it's a conspiracy!"
In second place, it's a comment from Flakbait on our post about Morrissey complaining about The Simpsons, in response to another commenter who simply asked "Who?":
No, Daltry and Townsend aren't the ones with the issue.
For editor's choice on the funny side, we start out with a comment from Thad deploying (possibly for the second time?) a joke about the European Commission's promises about upload filters and free speech:
I did the "I want everything in one bag but I don't want the bag to be heavy" reference last time, right?
And finally, we've got a simple little joke from Pixelation to somebody (helpfully!) catching a typo in one of our posts:
That's very pedanti of you.
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
"Inability" is entirely the wrong word.
White Minnesota Man Drags Cop By SUV & Hits Officer With a Hammer, Still Alive
Did Police Take Dylann Roof to Burger King?
(tl;dr it's unclear whether they took him to Burger King or just brought him food from Burger King, but they definitely took him in alive)
Taken Without Incident: Why White Criminals End Up Alive
Naked White Murder Suspect Peacefully Arrested While Resisting | NowThis
(video; nudity is pixellated)
Violent White Folks Who Were Taken Into Custody With Loving Care By Police
Police are entirely capable of apprehending suspects, even violent and dangerous ones, without killing them. They know how to do it.
Framing police violence against nonwhite suspects as an "inability to de-escalate" is a dangerous and counterproductive category error. It fits the narrative that this is simply a matter of training, that if police had better training, things like this wouldn't happen.
They have the ability to de-escalate. They deploy it selectively. The issue isn't training. It's racism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And remember that the police has been shown how it can be done:
https://thefreethoughtproject.com/watch-swedish-police-show-nypd/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Well, you do pick your samples selectively, to some degree. And as far as I can figure out, being a homeless person is also a lot more likely to end you up dead even if you are white. That's not quite racism but rather station-of-life (and thus ability-to-cause-trouble) based. Racism would be involved when they misjudge an influential black guy.
So I am not sure whether the main motivation with some of those incidents is actually racism (having an ax to grind with colored people) or sadistic bullying cowards who mainly pick black targets because they are least likely to cause followup trouble. Not least because DA, judge and jury are very likely to look the other way.
The infection is not just where the pus comes out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
..."colored people"? The fuck century is this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You may want to research why “colored” in reference to people is…let’s say, “problematic” at best. I suggest you start such research with the origin of the phrase “women of color”.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You realize that lot's of racism and other forms of bigotry are largely unconscious and unexamined, right? Stupidly treating Black people as more of a threat doesn't mean that one is a wannabe White supremacist.
(On the other hand, the people who get all upset and go into denial mode whenever it is suggested that there is bias in society are generally edging more toward open, conscious racism. Frequently included is the belief that Black people or whoever are "reverse racist" on poor poor straight, cis-, White, neurotypical guys and they all use their weird, unexplainable powers to destroy them.)
So yeah, racism. Other axes play a part too, so economic disadvantage, and homelessness * are other factors weighing against some people.
*A majority of homeless people have untreated psychological issues. It isn't just an economic axis at work there.
sadistic bullying cowards who mainly pick black targets because they are least likely to cause followup trouble.
That's still pretty racist, using the disadvantage of Blackness against them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
as to Josh
How about any corp that is willing to pay a FEW of their employee's in wage/favors/bonus/stocks/anything else,
More money then you get.
More money then 10 times what You get.
More then 20 times what you get.
More then 30 times what you get.
Why not Pay back the stock holders? insted of using stocks as a long term <.5% interest loan. Insted of making 3 Different stocks, and 2 of them give the owner NOTHING, except Pennies on the dollar(that ISNT what they were for)
HOW about giving a Living wage to those at the bottom? HELP those that are helping your business. If you want the debate of who is worth more then a Janitor, lets have it. Fire all your Janitors for 1 month. and SEE what you are missing.
Basic econ 101+.
Who can affect the economy more? Rich or poor? Consider this is a 1/100 comparison. Can 1 rich person have MORE affect over 100 People making <$20 per hour?
100 People paying for-
Rents, electric, gas, coal, water, Taxes, insurance, car maintenance, Fuel for car, Lawnmowers, Cable, Cellphones, Video games, Over priced Food, repairs on goods that are designed to Fail, Re-buying those same goods when you CANT fix them, Cars, trucks, Family vehicles, Clothing that wont last more then a few years EVEN when made of synthetics that are DURABLE, Cotton clothing so thin you can see threw it, On and on again and again.
Even those 100 will spend Every cent they have.
$20 per hour x40 x4=$3200 per month?
rent -$800 to $1000= 1200
Cable TV/Cellphones/internet = $200 comes to $1000 for bills and feeding your family?
And you wonder WHY so many FEMALES would rather be on assistance?
It REALLY isnt worth Working anymore. There IS NO GAIN, for the future. go listen to the old songs about the Coal miner days, and Wonder HOW they survived.
Lets all quit, and go on assistance, to get the Gov. to UNDERSTAND, how much power we do have, IF THEY DONT FIX THINGS. Unionized states will love this. Land Lords Will hate us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]