It's odd because Comcast does comms and FB is a social media network. One of FB's jobs is to keep undesirable content from being made widely available; the undesirable censorship is most likely the result of an automated system being employed to keep up with the demands from governments and assorted pressure groups to "Get that down right now!"
Compliance with a range of industry regulations is a major part of the operation of any large business. I deal with FGas registers and TM44 survey certificates, FB deals with "How's your CP and copyright infringement takedown effort going?"
Re: Re: Re: Facebook, Google, Twitter all have their thumbs on the scale;
Would you rather be chucked in a deep pool of water or left to fend for yourself in a forest fire?
Those are your choices, Mason.
That the third party options never garner more than 1% of the vote is the problem; people prefer to vote for Kang or Kodos because each team is afraid that the other bad guy will get in.
That some of them are frankly nuts (Prohibition party? Really?) is not an issue. The problem is that the ones who are determine to stay true to their ideals tend to form their own parties (and thereby split the vote) while those who are determined to get into office tend to join one of the Big Two. You get the odd exception but it's odd because people fear change, they won't get out of the box they're accustomed to being in.
Hell, I even find it hard to throw away old clothes and shoes, it must be something like that for voters.
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Do not pass GO, do not collect your next paycheck from the public, go straight to Officially working for the ones who own you'
Mad idea: stand for office yourself or support and gather support for an outsider. Rinse and repeat. If enough outsiders supplant the incumbents they won't have the power any more. At this point you need to keep the heat on the new guys to get the laws changed so they don't just take over where the old guys left off.
Wrong analogy. In a government situation there's a culture of complicity with the governing regime until the people won't support it any more. Even the really repressive ones require a compliant majority.
In a rape situation there's nothing to rebel against as such; you just have a victim trying to put his or her life back together after an horrific event.
^This. What scares me, though, is that if these are like ACTA, and they get the "lite" versions through, they can change the rules of the game without consulting the rest of us after they've been signed and sealed.
I'm really glad he asked that question. The only reason the "deterrent" argument has held sway for so long is that we were convinced that all the loons were on the other side.
Now we're being made to question that assumption. Believe me, no one who is actually willing to unleash hell is going to fear that the other guy might do it, too.
Erm... please can you disengage your cognitive dissonance? Thank you.
Okay... during his military service McCain was a govt. employee and it was TOTALLY his job to serve the government. Today he is a senator and therefore an actual part of the governing process, i.e. a servant of the government.
The chokepoint in your logic is the role of government. The government is not a lion in a cage being held back with a whip and a chair while we put our heads in its mouth and hope to walk away unscathed. The government is supposed to be the servant of the people and is tasked with carrying out the administration of the nation. Whoever manages and controls the administration controls the nation, whether this is outsourced to private enterprises or not.
Ever since "government" was identified as a boogeyman to fear and loathe, a "them and us" situation has obtained. Now the government, which has been alienated from the people by such thinking, tends to consider non-government people as boogeymen to be feared and kept under control — like the lion in the cage being held back with a whip and a chair.
When government serves the people, it's working as intended. Solution: get the government to serve the people.
It begins with understanding what's involved in governance and working from there. It also means being in touch with your representatives and holding them to account. I'm sure McCain would very soon change his attitude if his constituents were constantly sending messages to the effect of, "Sir, we are not terrorists and America was not conceived as a police state so why are you working to turn it into one? Stop this or we'll vote Dem in November."
You see the trouble with McCain is that he's got the wrong people pulling his strings, and you can tell that by the fact that he's demanding that tech companies to make money off of surveillance of you. I'll bet there's someone with deep pockets and an eye on the upcoming election behind that.
Re: It's probably cheaper for the City to provide Internet to the homeless.
Erm... is this a good time to point out that if you walked into an NHS hospital over here they'd sort you out and send you home without charging you at all?
Your situation is the result of Red Scare politics in which anything paid for by taxes that benefits the public is considered SOCIALIST! Run for your lives!!!1OneEleven!
I've been told (by a libertarian, no less!) that extending Medicaid to all is the solution. So, if y'all can give up getting all paranoid about people you don't approve of getting medical attention free at the point of delivery, you can look forward to a 21st century high-standard heathlcare system, but that depends on actually implementing Andrew's idea. If idiot-ology is really all that's stopping this from being done, I say ditch it.
We've actually got that, but they work for corporations and are called "Lobbyists."
In such a vile system, the self-interest of all parties involved is to strive for ever-greater, more centralized power and wealth; to be used in pandering to ever-more-incompatible interest groups.
This is why I point and laugh at the "small government" brigade. Anyone who thinks that handing power to the corporations (which is what we've done) in order to increase efficiency is going to actually increase efficiency is a fool. Any bureaucracy will work to perpetuate itself, whoever pays their wages.
We're so desperate for change that anything that upsets the status quo will do us. That both scares and elates me. Personally, I'm hoping that if Trump wins the system will reset. It needs to.
Erm, I disagree. Anarchy does not scale, for a start. We need people who know how the system is supposed to work. One of the reasons the system we have is so broken is that established procedures are not being adhered to. Much of the time this is not quite intentional; people don't know what the rules either are or what they're supposed to be before they break them.
Ignorance is a massive problem, is what I'm saying, and as it happens some of our politicians are indeed random yahoos off the street; they've got no clue about what the Constitution says or how Congressional procedures are supposed to work.
For this reason I'm of the opinion that people who aspire to positions of authority in government need to gain a qualification in governance before applying for the job. Imagine a government administration run by people who actually know what they're doing.
Re: "You can't tell any person that voted for Obama that they are wrong."
At some point, if you want a working community, you're going to have to get past the us v. them rhetoric. Color-coded sides do make for easy logic and fun movies, but real people don't fit into convenient categories
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 91: Is Facebook Moderation A Necessary Evil?
Re:
Compliance with a range of industry regulations is a major part of the operation of any large business. I deal with FGas registers and TM44 survey certificates, FB deals with "How's your CP and copyright infringement takedown effort going?"
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 91: Is Facebook Moderation A Necessary Evil?
Re: Re: Re: Facebook, Google, Twitter all have their thumbs on the scale;
Those are your choices, Mason.
That the third party options never garner more than 1% of the vote is the problem; people prefer to vote for Kang or Kodos because each team is afraid that the other bad guy will get in.
That some of them are frankly nuts (Prohibition party? Really?) is not an issue. The problem is that the ones who are determine to stay true to their ideals tend to form their own parties (and thereby split the vote) while those who are determined to get into office tend to join one of the Big Two. You get the odd exception but it's odd because people fear change, they won't get out of the box they're accustomed to being in.
Hell, I even find it hard to throw away old clothes and shoes, it must be something like that for voters.
On the post: Nashville Council Member Admits AT&T & Comcast Wrote The Anti-Google Fiber Bill She Submitted
Re: Re: Re: Re: 'Do not pass GO, do not collect your next paycheck from the public, go straight to Officially working for the ones who own you'
On the post: HP Launched Delayed DRM Time Bomb To Disable Competing Printer Cartridges
Re:
On the post: Will The Washington Post Give Back Its Pulitzer And Stand Trial With Snowden?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: WP is treasonus
On the post: Guy Arrested Over KickassTorrents Blocked From Talking To His US Attorney
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Corruption
In a rape situation there's nothing to rebel against as such; you just have a victim trying to put his or her life back together after an horrific event.
On the post: Guy Arrested Over KickassTorrents Blocked From Talking To His US Attorney
Re: Re:
[Sad but True]
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: September 11th
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Obama's Last Gasp At Trade Deals: Lame Duck Push On TPP; And 'Lite' Version Of TTIP
Re: Calling These Pacts "Free Trade" is a Lie
On the post: Senator John McCain Uses Cybersecurity Hearing To Try To Shame Twitter For Not Selling Data To The CIA
Re:
On the post: Senator John McCain Uses Cybersecurity Hearing To Try To Shame Twitter For Not Selling Data To The CIA
Re: Re: What have you got to lose?
Now we're being made to question that assumption. Believe me, no one who is actually willing to unleash hell is going to fear that the other guy might do it, too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snTaSJk0n_Y
On the post: Senator John McCain Uses Cybersecurity Hearing To Try To Shame Twitter For Not Selling Data To The CIA
Re: McCain
Okay... during his military service McCain was a govt. employee and it was TOTALLY his job to serve the government. Today he is a senator and therefore an actual part of the governing process, i.e. a servant of the government.
The chokepoint in your logic is the role of government. The government is not a lion in a cage being held back with a whip and a chair while we put our heads in its mouth and hope to walk away unscathed. The government is supposed to be the servant of the people and is tasked with carrying out the administration of the nation. Whoever manages and controls the administration controls the nation, whether this is outsourced to private enterprises or not.
Ever since "government" was identified as a boogeyman to fear and loathe, a "them and us" situation has obtained. Now the government, which has been alienated from the people by such thinking, tends to consider non-government people as boogeymen to be feared and kept under control — like the lion in the cage being held back with a whip and a chair.
When government serves the people, it's working as intended. Solution: get the government to serve the people.
It begins with understanding what's involved in governance and working from there. It also means being in touch with your representatives and holding them to account. I'm sure McCain would very soon change his attitude if his constituents were constantly sending messages to the effect of, "Sir, we are not terrorists and America was not conceived as a police state so why are you working to turn it into one? Stop this or we'll vote Dem in November."
You see the trouble with McCain is that he's got the wrong people pulling his strings, and you can tell that by the fact that he's demanding that tech companies to make money off of surveillance of you. I'll bet there's someone with deep pockets and an eye on the upcoming election behind that.
On the post: Another Bad EU Ruling: WiFi Providers Can Be Forced To Require Passwords If Copyright Holders Demand It
Re: Copyright trumps all other rights
On the post: NYC Kills Internet Browsing At Free WiFi Kiosks After The City's Homeless Actually Use It
Re: It's probably cheaper for the City to provide Internet to the homeless.
Your situation is the result of Red Scare politics in which anything paid for by taxes that benefits the public is considered SOCIALIST! Run for your lives!!!1OneEleven!
I've been told (by a libertarian, no less!) that extending Medicaid to all is the solution. So, if y'all can give up getting all paranoid about people you don't approve of getting medical attention free at the point of delivery, you can look forward to a 21st century high-standard heathlcare system, but that depends on actually implementing Andrew's idea. If idiot-ology is really all that's stopping this from being done, I say ditch it.
On the post: House Intel Committee Says Snowden's Not A Whistleblower, 'Cause He Once Emailed His Boss's Boss
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In such a vile system, the self-interest of all parties involved is to strive for ever-greater, more centralized power and wealth; to be used in pandering to ever-more-incompatible interest groups.
This is why I point and laugh at the "small government" brigade. Anyone who thinks that handing power to the corporations (which is what we've done) in order to increase efficiency is going to actually increase efficiency is a fool. Any bureaucracy will work to perpetuate itself, whoever pays their wages.
On the post: House Intel Committee Says Snowden's Not A Whistleblower, 'Cause He Once Emailed His Boss's Boss
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: House Intel Committee Says Snowden's Not A Whistleblower, 'Cause He Once Emailed His Boss's Boss
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ignorance is a massive problem, is what I'm saying, and as it happens some of our politicians are indeed random yahoos off the street; they've got no clue about what the Constitution says or how Congressional procedures are supposed to work.
For this reason I'm of the opinion that people who aspire to positions of authority in government need to gain a qualification in governance before applying for the job. Imagine a government administration run by people who actually know what they're doing.
A girl can dream.
On the post: House Intel Committee Says Snowden's Not A Whistleblower, 'Cause He Once Emailed His Boss's Boss
Re: "You can't tell any person that voted for Obama that they are wrong."
What Uriel-238 says.
On the post: House Intel Committee Says Snowden's Not A Whistleblower, 'Cause He Once Emailed His Boss's Boss
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>