Bobmail to the rest of the world:
"Fibble dibble bop cluck cluck shrimp paste!"
Back in the real world, there is zero causal link between CDA 230 and the existence of revenge porn.
Back in the real world:
a) CDA 230 gives zero protection to defamers
b) without CDA 230, frauds suing platforms for defamation will still lose their meritless cases in the end.
In the real world, the only harm being immunised from is that coming from the frauds that want to improperly sue platforms.
When they start colluding together to kick people off what is essentially the primary communication systems of the world it starts to be concerning.
By your own definition, it's not concerning.
[Projects facts not in evidence]
I read it
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
AC's self-reflection level: Vampire
Clearly Masnick is not interested in discussing real solutions. He would rather attack those who do, adding no substantive ideas of his own
[projects facts not in evidence]
If you knew anything about what you were talking about, you'd know that no privately-owned platform is, or could ever possibly be, a "public square."
Nor does he understand Hitchens's razor.
Projects the kid who hasn't yet reached the "your/you're" part of grade school that copypastes worn-out talking points.
You: "I'm mad the Republicans weren't able to manipulate the election."
Me: *points out your "undermine Democracy" projection*
You: "Here's an unsourced quote supposedly from Biden about an unrelated point from a different commenter."
That's cute, but irrelevant to my comment.
So as expected, you have nothing.
Does it matter? The first one allows the platform to weaponize it's beliefs in such a way that it can undermine Democracy,
[Asserts facts not in evidence]
Yeah find an extreme Republican and use it as a brush to paint anyone who isn't in your party.
bullshit from their moderators.
[Citation needed]
Next >>
On the post: House Republicans Have A Big Tech Plan... That Is Both Unconstitutional And Ridiculous
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: blocked account of trump while he was still
Bobmail to the rest of the world:
"Fibble dibble bop cluck cluck shrimp paste!"
On the post: No, Revoking Section 230 Would Not 'Save Democracy'
Re: Re:
Back in the real world, there is zero causal link between CDA 230 and the existence of revenge porn.
On the post: No, Revoking Section 230 Would Not 'Save Democracy'
Re: Re: The motives are painfully clear.
Back in the real world:
a) CDA 230 gives zero protection to defamers
b) without CDA 230, frauds suing platforms for defamation will still lose their meritless cases in the end.
On the post: No, Revoking Section 230 Would Not 'Save Democracy'
Re:
In the real world, the only harm being immunised from is that coming from the frauds that want to improperly sue platforms.
On the post: No, Revoking Section 230 Would Not 'Save Democracy'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
By your own definition, it's not concerning.
On the post: House Republicans Have A Big Tech Plan... That Is Both Unconstitutional And Ridiculous
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Very Simple
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: House Republicans Have A Big Tech Plan... That Is Both Unconstitutional And Ridiculous
Re: Re:
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: House Republicans Have A Big Tech Plan... That Is Both Unconstitutional And Ridiculous
Re: Re: Re: blocked account of trump while he was still the pres
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Twitter Removes Account Of Human Rights Activist (2018)
Re:
AC's self-reflection level: Vampire
On the post: No, Revoking Section 230 Would Not 'Save Democracy'
Re: JJ Mendacious
[projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: No, Revoking Section 230 Would Not 'Save Democracy'
Re:
If you knew anything about what you were talking about, you'd know that no privately-owned platform is, or could ever possibly be, a "public square."
On the post: How Can Conservatives Fight Back Against Big Tech? For A Start, Just Be Sane Again.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Nor does he understand Hitchens's razor.
On the post: How Can Conservatives Fight Back Against Big Tech? For A Start, Just Be Sane Again.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Projects the kid who hasn't yet reached the "your/you're" part of grade school that copypastes worn-out talking points.
On the post: How Can Conservatives Fight Back Against Big Tech? For A Start, Just Be Sane Again.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You: "I'm mad the Republicans weren't able to manipulate the election."
Me: *points out your "undermine Democracy" projection*
You: "Here's an unsourced quote supposedly from Biden about an unrelated point from a different commenter."
On the post: How Can Conservatives Fight Back Against Big Tech? For A Start, Just Be Sane Again.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
That's cute, but irrelevant to my comment.
On the post: California Appeals Court Says Section 230 Immunizes Twitter From Banned User's Lawsuit
Re: Re: Re: Re: ... N/A?
So as expected, you have nothing.
On the post: How Can Conservatives Fight Back Against Big Tech? For A Start, Just Be Sane Again.
Re: Re:
[Asserts facts not in evidence]
On the post: Court Tosses RICO Lawsuit Demanding $90 Million And The Dissolution Of Google For Supposed Anti-Conservative Bias
Re: Re: "Google's anti-conservative bias..."
[Asserts facts not in evidence]
On the post: Court Tosses RICO Lawsuit Demanding $90 Million And The Dissolution Of Google For Supposed Anti-Conservative Bias
Re: Re: Re:
[Asserts facts not in evidence]
On the post: California Appeals Court Says Section 230 Immunizes Twitter From Banned User's Lawsuit
Re: Re: ... N/A?
[Citation needed]
Next >>