...But I’m kinda glad that bills like these are being churned out by the local level. Not because they’re good legislation, oh no they’re godawful reactionary reactions that are born out of moral panic, but because they’re self-defeating. These anti-section 230 bills, succeed or no, would only provide us examples whenever a dumbass like Brammer would bring up something that should fit section 230.
I do admire that you’re trying to take a diplomatic approach to Tillis’ bill, but honestly, I think that if Tillis were to ignore it the first time, he’ll probably ignore it the second time. He’s a puppet of the Copyright Mafia, so what they ask, Tillis does. I’m not saying the diplomatic approach is doomed on arrival, but I think now is the time to be more obstructionistic against America’s version of Article 13.
Conservatives: We are defenders of freedom of expression.
Also Conservative: We want to get rid of Section 230 because it’s mean to our free speech.
Also Also Conservatives: No kneeling! You can’t express rebellion you fucking normies! Reeeeeeeeeeee!
Why are lawmakers trying legislate section 230 at the state level? Trying to reform section 230 at the national level at least makes sense. It's a National nonissue, but if you want to reform the literal bedrock of the internet (PS you shouldn’t), it’s something that has to be handled by the U.S. Congress.
And for that matter, how do you even regulate content moderation at the state or local level? How does that even work? It’s not exactly like regulating routes for their speed limits or regulating broadband.
I agree, but executing another blackout is going to be trickier than the last. One, you have to convince at least some of the social media giants to do a collective blackout in one day; since corporations usually puts money first, maybe some social media companies might just think that it’s not worth the short term financial loss or even think that they can survive the revocation of Section 230 or America’s version of Article 13. The first blackout was successful because 1) the public perception of the internet was way more positive a decade ago, 2) misinformation wasn’t a major concern, and 3) the enemy was clear and specific. To do a blackout relies on the principles of speech: pathos (emotion), ethos (ethics), logos (logic), and timing.
I don’t want to come across as pessimistic or saying that a blackout would be impossible. I am just saying that execution has be on the same level as the SOPA blackout and doing it a second time would be difficult because of the changed landscape.
Ah yes, the three subjects that students of all grades should learn:
-History
-Math
-The convoluted, one sided, and overall corrupt Pseudo-nuisances of copyright registration and enforcement (this should definitely replace art and music)
On the post: PACT Act Is Back: Bipartisan Section 230 'Reform' Bill Remains Mistargeted And Destructive
We made this with good intentions
Haven’t anyone on top of Capitol Hill know that the road to hell is paved with good intentions and bad internet bills.
On the post: Maryland Legislators Pass Bill That Would Keep Most Teens From Being Prosecuted For Sexting
Maryland: “Well boys we did it. Sexting is no more.”
On the post: DOJ Says Encryption Is Just For Criminals As It Goes After Another Secure Phone Purveyor
Re: NOTE:
(Keep in mind, I’m referring to the DOJ, not the author)
On the post: DOJ Says Encryption Is Just For Criminals As It Goes After Another Secure Phone Purveyor
https://youtu.be/oGUQLrkX4AE
On the post: Utah Legislature Wraps Up Session By Passing Two Unconstitutional Internet Bills
This sounds contradictory ...
...But I’m kinda glad that bills like these are being churned out by the local level. Not because they’re good legislation, oh no they’re godawful reactionary reactions that are born out of moral panic, but because they’re self-defeating. These anti-section 230 bills, succeed or no, would only provide us examples whenever a dumbass like Brammer would bring up something that should fit section 230.
On the post: Tennessee Lawmakers' Latest Attack On Section 230 Would Basically Ban All Government Investment
Well done State of Tennessee, you went full retarded.
On the post: The Digital Copyright Act: We Told Senator Tillis Not To Do This, But He Did It Anyway. So We Told Him Again.
I hate sounding like a pessimist and a contrarian
I do admire that you’re trying to take a diplomatic approach to Tillis’ bill, but honestly, I think that if Tillis were to ignore it the first time, he’ll probably ignore it the second time. He’s a puppet of the Copyright Mafia, so what they ask, Tillis does. I’m not saying the diplomatic approach is doomed on arrival, but I think now is the time to be more obstructionistic against America’s version of Article 13.
On the post: CIA To FOIA Requester: Assassination Attempts Are Illegal So Of Course We Don't Have Any Records About Our Illegal Assassination Attempts
“Assassinations are illegal.”
When people are killed, they die.
On the post: Federal Court Says There's Nothing Wrong With Arresting Someone For Parodying A Police Department Facebook Page
It’s only funny when you’re the only to make jokes.
On the post: Illinois Lawmaker Proposes Unconstitutional Ban Of 'GTA' In Response To Carjackings
Why don’t we ban sugar, because sugar is a drug. And as we know, drugs are bad, m’kay.
On the post: Tennessee Politicians Ask State Colleges To Forbid Student-Athletes From Kneeling During The National Anthem
Conservatives: We are defenders of freedom of expression.
Also Conservative: We want to get rid of Section 230 because it’s mean to our free speech.
Also Also Conservatives: No kneeling! You can’t express rebellion you fucking normies! Reeeeeeeeeeee!
On the post: North Dakota's New Anti-230 Bill Would Let Nazis Sue You For Reporting Their Content To Twitter
This is just utter nonsense
Why are lawmakers trying legislate section 230 at the state level? Trying to reform section 230 at the national level at least makes sense. It's a National nonissue, but if you want to reform the literal bedrock of the internet (PS you shouldn’t), it’s something that has to be handled by the U.S. Congress.
And for that matter, how do you even regulate content moderation at the state or local level? How does that even work? It’s not exactly like regulating routes for their speed limits or regulating broadband.
On the post: Orrin Hatch, Who Once Wanted To Destroy The Computers Of Anyone Who Infringed On Copyrights, Now Lies About Section 230
Backlash to Section 230 in a Nutshell
Hatch: “Section 230 poisoned our water, burned our crops, and brought a plague on our houses!”
Other senators: “He did?”
Hatch: “No! But are we going to wait for that to happen?!”
On the post: How To Think About Online Ads And Section 230
Re: Internet blackout time to save section 230
Okay mate. I’m just as enthusiastic to stop the evisceration of Section 230, but at this point you’re just reducing to spamming.
On the post: Why Is Congress Pushing For Locking Up More Culture?
Re: Re: Re: Time for another internet blackout
From my many years on the internet, I’ve became an adamant follower of Murphy’s Law. Specifically the phrase:
“Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.”
I prefer to be cautiously optimistic, emphasis on cautiously.
On the post: Chastity Penis Lock Company That Was Hacked Says It's Now Totally Safe To Put Your Penis Back In That Chastity Lock
Re: Their new tagline...
Noice.
On the post: Why Is Congress Pushing For Locking Up More Culture?
Re: Time for another internet blackout
I agree, but executing another blackout is going to be trickier than the last. One, you have to convince at least some of the social media giants to do a collective blackout in one day; since corporations usually puts money first, maybe some social media companies might just think that it’s not worth the short term financial loss or even think that they can survive the revocation of Section 230 or America’s version of Article 13. The first blackout was successful because 1) the public perception of the internet was way more positive a decade ago, 2) misinformation wasn’t a major concern, and 3) the enemy was clear and specific. To do a blackout relies on the principles of speech: pathos (emotion), ethos (ethics), logos (logic), and timing.
I don’t want to come across as pessimistic or saying that a blackout would be impossible. I am just saying that execution has be on the same level as the SOPA blackout and doing it a second time would be difficult because of the changed landscape.
On the post: Why Is Congress Pushing For Locking Up More Culture?
Ah yes, the three subjects that students of all grades should learn:
-History
-Math
-The convoluted, one sided, and overall corrupt Pseudo-nuisances of copyright registration and enforcement (this should definitely replace art and music)
On the post: Without Twitter, Trump Is Left To Write Tweets He Would Have Said On Paper
Now that Trump is out of office, exiled from social media, he is finally harassed by his greatest enemy...silence.
And I couldn’t be so much more happy about this happening to the worst president in U.S. history.
On the post: Now It's The Democrats Turn To Destroy The Open Internet: Mark Warner's 230 Reform Bill Is A Dumpster Fire Of Cluelessness
Re: Re: Honeymoon period
Okay Doomer.
Next >>