The potential for abuse is in everything and everyone. Not a good enough reason to rob us of navigability on the internet or of platforms on which to express ourselves and connect with like-minded people in case the likes of Hamilton shows up to lie about us.
Why you think someone who spreads lies about people (like a search engine or social media service) should be immune from this is beyond me. Talk to female victims of revenge porn and ask them what they think of Section 230, the law that allowed those who ruined their lives to escape liability, or talk to a doctor who was threatened with being called a pedophile by people who weaponize Google. Your views might change.
Ahem! As a female and victim of lies spread online I blame no one but the poster.
Google can't be weaponized and liars gonna lie whether there are search engines or not. You have yet to advise how you'd navigate the internet without a search engine.
I've been defamed. It's gone RL and I've been called into the office at work to explain why my employers had been contacted with allegations that I later proved were the work of a troll. I'm still working for the same company and have since been promoted. Now shut up. Your arguments are wholly based on appeals to emotion and have no logical or factual basis.
I'm trying to effect this by getting people to consider alternatives, e.g. GIMP or Inkscape. Apparenlty there's Krita as well, I'll have to give that a go.
Gary, what is the problem you're experiencing with GIMP? What are you trying to do? The answer may well be on one of the many video tutorials I found online when trying to do things. It helps to get add-ons such as G'Mic. If it's the fact that it does raster rather than vector images, I'd suggest using Inkscape for those. Otherwise, export the image you're working on to a .png file as that will scale and won't halo.
I'd also use Inkscape for circles as they don't "step." You can then export the image as a .png or bitmap file and open it in GIMP to continue playing with it.
I'm not being paid to shill GIMP or anything, I just want to promote OS and get as many people as possible to use it -- and love it.
I've not done any creative work for hire since 2013 but I do like to play around and every time someone mentions the Adobe creative suites of programs as the be all and end all I flat out LOL. Why? Because I can recreate anything they come up with using my OS tools GIMP and Inkscape.
If I wanted to design a website from scratch without using a one-click Wordpress upload I can use Kompozer and a div grid layout. What do we need proprietary software for again? OS can do the same damn thing. Okay, so you might need to flip between Inkscape (for logos, etc.) and GIMP (for everything else. I pull the bitmaps in from Inkscape to GIMP because they scale neatly, then export to .png), but it's not hard and the results are every bit as good. Best of all, GIMP is intuitive and easy to use. When I took a Photoshop course a few years ago I found it hard to work pixel by pixel like you can in GIMP.
If Adobe doesn't change its attitude it'll soon find itself being eclipsed by OS and the OS programs will become the industry default.
It apparently takes about five clicks to hide a comment. That's five clicks from five individuals. I clicked "hide." Now you click. Two more clicks, then it's hidden.
Techdirt cares enough about ethics to call people out when they behave badly. It also advocates for the public good, and in favour of upholding the constitutional rights of everyone, not just the "good people." Techdirt also cares about due process and the rule of law.
I've been called a scammer, rapist, and a bunch of horrible names.
Boo dee hoo! I've been targeted in real life and had to get the cops to confirm I wasn't under investigation for the actions I'd been accused of. I'm neither suing nor calling for Section 230 (or whatever they call it over here) to be repealed.
RE: commenters here, I've got (at least) one who appears to believe I post under multiple aliases here (I don't) and calls me all sorts of crazy things, then, when called on it, declares it's all a joke. After this, he whines that we don't take him seriously. Do you see me whining about it? Nope. Not going to.
As I've stated many times, unless people actually believe it and you are affected in real life by it, nothing that anyone says about you matters, however negative it is. AND potential harm is not the same as being hauled into the office and asked to explain to senior management why they've had a message accusing you of all sorts of shenanigans.
Figures a lowlife like Masnick wouldn't attract a very intelligent fan base
Says the man who continually whines about defamation. I'll take Masnick over you any day. At least he's honest and stands by his words. I've often disagreed with him but totally respect him.
We're all defenceless against defamation, 230 or not. Defamers will defame, and lawsuits are a rich man's game. I can't afford to sue, and wouldn't. That's why I relied on my own good conduct and the fact that the liar who defamed me couldn't keep his story straight. Or stand by his claims. That's why he failed.
Actually, that's impossible unless people are generally more stupid than I give them "credit" for, or unless the story gains credence in some way.
I had someone try to wreck my life by telling lies about me. They failed because I was able to prove they were lies.
Shut up, Jhon. You know nothing. Try being on the end of actual defamation like I was some time. Not the search engines' fault, nor the platform. It was troll's fault.
Even one individual's reputation should be more important than any search engine's.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
An individual's reputation, as I've stated many times before, is based on their own personal conduct. People telling lies about them only makes other people curious about them and causes them to check them out. When liars told lies about me, people found a gobby Irishwoman, not a mad criminal, when they checked me out.
Some have committed suicide over bullying or lies and 230 enabled the mobs to form online
230 did nothing of the sort. Nasty, evil weevils of the kind who bully other kids to suicide are solely and completely responsible for posting and spreading the nastiness. The unfortunate victim's act is on the victim and the people around him or her. I don't blame suicides for their own actions because I understand the desperation that drives them to it.
Mobs form with or without 230 being in place, that being the nature of mobs and mobbing in general.
On the post: Vox Admits It Got Section 230 Wrong, Fixes Its Mistake
Re:
The potential for abuse is in everything and everyone. Not a good enough reason to rob us of navigability on the internet or of platforms on which to express ourselves and connect with like-minded people in case the likes of Hamilton shows up to lie about us.
On the post: Vox Admits It Got Section 230 Wrong, Fixes Its Mistake
Re:
Why you think someone who spreads lies about people (like a search engine or social media service) should be immune from this is beyond me. Talk to female victims of revenge porn and ask them what they think of Section 230, the law that allowed those who ruined their lives to escape liability, or talk to a doctor who was threatened with being called a pedophile by people who weaponize Google. Your views might change.
Ahem! As a female and victim of lies spread online I blame no one but the poster.
Google can't be weaponized and liars gonna lie whether there are search engines or not. You have yet to advise how you'd navigate the internet without a search engine.
I've been defamed. It's gone RL and I've been called into the office at work to explain why my employers had been contacted with allegations that I later proved were the work of a troll. I'm still working for the same company and have since been promoted. Now shut up. Your arguments are wholly based on appeals to emotion and have no logical or factual basis.
On the post: Adobe Warns Users Someone Else Might Sue Them For Using Old Versions Of Photoshop
Re: Re: That's messed up
I'm trying to effect this by getting people to consider alternatives, e.g. GIMP or Inkscape. Apparenlty there's Krita as well, I'll have to give that a go.
On the post: Adobe Warns Users Someone Else Might Sue Them For Using Old Versions Of Photoshop
Re: Re: Re: Yet another reason...
Gary, what is the problem you're experiencing with GIMP? What are you trying to do? The answer may well be on one of the many video tutorials I found online when trying to do things. It helps to get add-ons such as G'Mic. If it's the fact that it does raster rather than vector images, I'd suggest using Inkscape for those. Otherwise, export the image you're working on to a .png file as that will scale and won't halo.
I'd also use Inkscape for circles as they don't "step." You can then export the image as a .png or bitmap file and open it in GIMP to continue playing with it.
I'm not being paid to shill GIMP or anything, I just want to promote OS and get as many people as possible to use it -- and love it.
On the post: Adobe Warns Users Someone Else Might Sue Them For Using Old Versions Of Photoshop
This is why I use OS for graphic and web design
I've not done any creative work for hire since 2013 but I do like to play around and every time someone mentions the Adobe creative suites of programs as the be all and end all I flat out LOL. Why? Because I can recreate anything they come up with using my OS tools GIMP and Inkscape.
If I wanted to design a website from scratch without using a one-click Wordpress upload I can use Kompozer and a div grid layout. What do we need proprietary software for again? OS can do the same damn thing. Okay, so you might need to flip between Inkscape (for logos, etc.) and GIMP (for everything else. I pull the bitmaps in from Inkscape to GIMP because they scale neatly, then export to .png), but it's not hard and the results are every bit as good. Best of all, GIMP is intuitive and easy to use. When I took a Photoshop course a few years ago I found it hard to work pixel by pixel like you can in GIMP.
If Adobe doesn't change its attitude it'll soon find itself being eclipsed by OS and the OS programs will become the industry default.
On the post: San Francisco PD Raids Journalist's Home To Find Out Which One Of Its Cops Leaked An Autopsy Report
Re:
It apparently takes about five clicks to hide a comment. That's five clicks from five individuals. I clicked "hide." Now you click. Two more clicks, then it's hidden.
On the post: Miami Plastic Surgeon Sues Two Patients For Negative Reviews After He Had Them Sign Illegal Non Disparagement Agreements
Re: Re: Re: Anonymous
Ask and you shall receive!
Techdirt cares enough about ethics to call people out when they behave badly. It also advocates for the public good, and in favour of upholding the constitutional rights of everyone, not just the "good people." Techdirt also cares about due process and the rule of law.
On the post: Miami Plastic Surgeon Sues Two Patients For Negative Reviews After He Had Them Sign Illegal Non Disparagement Agreements
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I've been called a scammer, rapist, and a bunch of horrible names.
Boo dee hoo! I've been targeted in real life and had to get the cops to confirm I wasn't under investigation for the actions I'd been accused of. I'm neither suing nor calling for Section 230 (or whatever they call it over here) to be repealed.
RE: commenters here, I've got (at least) one who appears to believe I post under multiple aliases here (I don't) and calls me all sorts of crazy things, then, when called on it, declares it's all a joke. After this, he whines that we don't take him seriously. Do you see me whining about it? Nope. Not going to.
As I've stated many times, unless people actually believe it and you are affected in real life by it, nothing that anyone says about you matters, however negative it is. AND potential harm is not the same as being hauled into the office and asked to explain to senior management why they've had a message accusing you of all sorts of shenanigans.
On the post: Miami Plastic Surgeon Sues Two Patients For Negative Reviews After He Had Them Sign Illegal Non Disparagement Agreements
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'll butter the popcorn, Paul.
On the post: Miami Plastic Surgeon Sues Two Patients For Negative Reviews After He Had Them Sign Illegal Non Disparagement Agreements
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And since he's anonymous, where's the "actual harm" required to make the claims actionable? I wait with bated breath... not!
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: May 5th - 11th
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm amused as hell to think that one of them is mine. Try wearing a tinfoil hat, Hamilton.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: May 5th - 11th
Re: Re: You have to take the pills *everyday*
I'm Wendy, much maligned administrator and regular commenter on TD using my real name because I'm not afraid to stand by my comments.
On the post: Strike 3 Gets Another Judge To Remind It That IP Addresses Aren't Infringers
Re: Re: Poor crybaby jhon
Given that his sources are probably on the wingnut end of the right wing media, I'd say you're right.
On the post: Strike 3 Gets Another Judge To Remind It That IP Addresses Aren't Infringers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Figures a lowlife like Masnick wouldn't attract a very intelligent fan base
Says the man who continually whines about defamation. I'll take Masnick over you any day. At least he's honest and stands by his words. I've often disagreed with him but totally respect him.
On the post: Strike 3 Gets Another Judge To Remind It That IP Addresses Aren't Infringers
Re: Re: Re:
We're all defenceless against defamation, 230 or not. Defamers will defame, and lawsuits are a rich man's game. I can't afford to sue, and wouldn't. That's why I relied on my own good conduct and the fact that the liar who defamed me couldn't keep his story straight. Or stand by his claims. That's why he failed.
On the post: Strike 3 Gets Another Judge To Remind It That IP Addresses Aren't Infringers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Mine often "places" me up to thirty miles away from where I actually live, so... good luck with that.
On the post: Strike 3 Gets Another Judge To Remind It That IP Addresses Aren't Infringers
Re:
Actually, that's impossible unless people are generally more stupid than I give them "credit" for, or unless the story gains credence in some way.
I had someone try to wreck my life by telling lies about me. They failed because I was able to prove they were lies.
Shut up, Jhon. You know nothing. Try being on the end of actual defamation like I was some time. Not the search engines' fault, nor the platform. It was troll's fault.
On the post: It's One Thing For Trolls And Grandstanding Politicians To Get CDA 230 Wrong, But The Press Shouldn't Help Them
Re: Re: Re:
Even one individual's reputation should be more important than any search engine's.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
An individual's reputation, as I've stated many times before, is based on their own personal conduct. People telling lies about them only makes other people curious about them and causes them to check them out. When liars told lies about me, people found a gobby Irishwoman, not a mad criminal, when they checked me out.
Some have committed suicide over bullying or lies and 230 enabled the mobs to form online
230 did nothing of the sort. Nasty, evil weevils of the kind who bully other kids to suicide are solely and completely responsible for posting and spreading the nastiness. The unfortunate victim's act is on the victim and the people around him or her. I don't blame suicides for their own actions because I understand the desperation that drives them to it.
Mobs form with or without 230 being in place, that being the nature of mobs and mobbing in general.
On the post: It's One Thing For Trolls And Grandstanding Politicians To Get CDA 230 Wrong, But The Press Shouldn't Help Them
Re: Re: Thought Control Legislation
Populism. Why think for yourself when you can just do whatever is most popular among your thought leaders?
On the post: It's One Thing For Trolls And Grandstanding Politicians To Get CDA 230 Wrong, But The Press Shouldn't Help Them
Re: Re:
One presumes that cheering on shooting up a church because it had black people in it as a good thing =/= hate in your book, AC. Good grief!
Next >>