Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a fan of history I'm guessing
I failed to present a compelling argument it seems, probably because I departed from a weak position (If your position is weak, look strong but don't engage, nincompoop - Not Sun Tzu). I think however that our views are not far apart.
I owe it to myself though to rephrase my position to try to wrestle it into some semblance of coherence. So, here goes.
We were talking about Government censorship and I feel that Merkel's position was quite the opposite of that. She was concerned that a private platform had the power to unilaterally cut off a man that speaks for 70 million Americans. We should here also recognize that Twitter functioned as the Pied Piper for all the other platforms who now felt safe to also ban the Trumpeter from their platform.
While we could like the resulting Trumpless silence, as I strongly suspect Merkel does too, we never make rules and legislation for situations where we like the outcome or when the decision maker is on our side. We make them for when the decisions are made by people that we do not like. So that, even if we don't like the decision, we can still accept that they were consistent and according to law and order. That might hearken back to Merkel's recognition of her country's dark past, by the way.
I can sympathize with that sentiment and I think that the situation bears thinking about.
Yes I know, weak tea "Let's think about something". Not a clarion call to action but it's all I got.
If people took the time to research and choose the platforms that best met their needs, we wouldn't be in the state of false dilemma where either a corporation or government has to make the choice for you.
Not quite. I can make a conscious decision to not go on Parler (and I did) but that still doesn't mean we, as a society, should allow everything that went on there. At the same time hypothetically a situation could arise where a platform is so powerful that you'd have a hard time avoiding it. If they started to moderate certain speech, potentially disadvantaging certain groups, that might be something that we, as a society, might not want either.
(note: I specifically mentioned spectrum, indicating that I don't feel that it's a "dilemma", so an either-or decision. I think there must be a system of checks and balances but I'm not smart enough to think of a system that would work)
I think you'd be guessing wrong. I'm confident she's acutely aware of German's history, especially since she was born in East Germany.
Despite its history though, Germans have a fundamentally different view of Government from Americans. Americans see government interference as inherently bad and something that must be limited as much as possible. Germans have a more benevolent look of central government where a high level of government involvement is required but you do need to ensure that the involvement is done in the proper way.
(Yes, the "positions" are exaggerated and don't account for a wide range of opinions existing in both countries but as shorthand I think they will serve)
Which now brings me to how I interpreted what she said. What I heard was that she was concerned that private companies have the kind of power that can switch off whole political organizations. A concern I've heard from many sides. In a more German (Merkel) view companies shouldn't have this kind of power but it should belong to a (benevolent) government.
It's a not unreasonable position to hold, regardless of your county's history. It's also not unreasonable to say you don't want governments to have that kind of power. To be honest I'm uncertain where I fall on this spectrum. It seems companies shouldn't act as our National Keeper of Morals but governments can also not be trusted unconditionally.
Re: 'Is he in the cult? Yes? That's all that's required.'
When it comes to Trump's GOP
I don't get the idea that Trump will be the next kingmaker in the GOP. Rubio and Cruz seem to be betting on that, as well as this this guy Candeub.
In the last 4 years Trump has shown that he has the attention span of a mayfly with ADHD (see: TikTok ban), plus it seem pretty clear he didn't really want to be president, he just wanted to masturbate his ego. Also, he expects fealty but he doesn't return loyalty.
So, the idea that he will be supporting your run for president (except perhaps Ivanka) or that he will keep supporting your career, seems speculative at best but is more likely delusional. Once he's no longer president and there is no "Legal Defense Money" flowing in anymore, he'll look for other ways to make money or get the attention he craves. God knows what that will be but I feel somebody else's interests do not figure highly in that equation.
It's also not like this blind devotion doesn't have any downsides. By espousing his rhetoric, you pretty much make it impossible for you to attract center leaning voters.
And it's obviously effective.
The scary bit is that it's even effective in Europe. If you go on Twitter there are many people from Europe repeating claims from Trumpetters about voter fraud, Antifa etc.
If you are a European correspondent for the US just reporting the same as CNN or MSNBC or even Fox, your Twitter feed is overrun by people saying you're a liar, you don't know anything about it and that, like all main stream media, you are in the pay of the dark deep state pedophile cabal that's ruling the world.
I swear that if they were up to their ankles in water in their basement and the msm was claiming their street was flooded, first they would go on 8kun, or where-ever they go nowadays, to check if it isn't some nefarious Soros plot to sell you sump pumps.
Not sure what you have but there is no immunity for legislators in The Netherlands. Wilders was/is (not sure where the appeal is) actually on trial for some statements he made during a campaign rally which were deemed racist.
The prime minister already made it quite clear that this will not go far. He didn't exactly use the word "Go fuck yourself" but it was close. Also, to my best knowledge, the law that was referred to in the article was actually abolished as of this year, so I don't think Gollum has a case.
So, what will happen is that Erdogan gives Wilders a fantastic international platform to spread his ideology. Wilders will simply be able to point at Erdogan and yell that he's being suppressed and that it's evidence of Muslim retarded ideology/religion. I predict an additional 5 seats in the polls for dear Geert.
I'm breakin' tech in the hot sun
I broke the law and the law's gone
I broke the law and the law's gone
I needed money 'cause I had none
I broke the law and the law's gone
I broke the law and the law's gone
What kind of dumb-ass community would say your non-sensical post was insightful?
2 of Stephen's comments on this thread are marked insightful while none of yours are. So, draw your own conclusion. It seems you are too smart for Techdirt, so go away.
The question is how long can this authoritarian approach expand before the rubber-band reaches its limits and snaps back on the regime.
Unfortunately probably longer than you might hope. It's a well known fact, for example, that some North Korean defectors still believe that the Kim family is the best thing that happened to Korea. If North Korea is a hell hole that's because of the people that are working against the Kims. They believe that even if they're in South Korea where they should be able to see that's a lie.
That's how powerful propaganda is. Compare that also to the Trumpist army that believes many blatantly untrue things about their savior and messiah, like that he is a successful business man. If they stay in the echo chamber it doesn't mater what the facts are.
I think most Chinese will assume that the government/communist party edited out some lies form Pence about China to protect them and keep their blood pressure in the Zen zone.
And there's a long line of journalists and experts who still somehow haven't quite figured that out yet.
All journalist have seen their livelihood threatened because all that sweet advertising money went to big tech. It seems that, regardless of their political leaning, they might not object to seeing facebook et al taken down a notch.
Could the tattooed person claim the same right that photographers have? They only have copyright on the composition, the way I understand it. Since the size, location on the body and the combination of different images is decided by the person being tattooed (usually), they could claim copyright on the composition?
Of course, this whole case is nuts. However, I can't wait for the first lawsuit over prison tats. "I own your ass!" would have a different meaning if the copyright is granted to the artist.
I'd be kind of open to let the past rest in cases where companies produced SS-uniforms 80 years ago. Probably nobody that worked there then, works there now and they changed their idol from Hitler to Mammon, so let it go.
However, recently they did make me annoyed with a commercial that used the word integrity. I can't remember the actual phrasing but they claimed it (integrity) was important. I'd think that, seeing their checkered past, they might steer clear of statements like that.
Re: Re: Re: 'If you won't do it we will' is never a pretty pictu
That's why it is so shortsighted of the Republicans that they want to replace Ruth Bader Ginsberg with a stock conservative judge.
Not only that. So, the upside for them is minimal, they go from a majority to a larger majority. However, if they make it part of the election they might rile up their base to go voting. I'm pretty sure there is a voter group out there that would hold their nose and vote for Trump again if they could be sure to overturn Roe v. Wade for example.
That and they could maintain a semblance of integrity although that does not seem to be a high priority.
Makes you wonder if they're already convinced they're going to lose...
On the post: The Bizarre Reaction To Facebook's Decision To Get Out Of The News Business In Australia
Re: Re: Maybe the link and snippet tax was a red herring.
Murdoch news helps liberal governments get re-elected.
He does? Do you know who owns Fox?
On the post: The Bizarre Reaction To Facebook's Decision To Get Out Of The News Business In Australia
Incompatible with democracy
I think Murdoch is incompatible with democracy.
On the post: Irony: German Chancellor Merkel Upset At Twitter For Banning Trump; Meanwhile Germany Demands Social Media Blocks Dangerous Content
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a fan of history I'm guessing
I failed to present a compelling argument it seems, probably because I departed from a weak position (If your position is weak, look strong but don't engage, nincompoop - Not Sun Tzu). I think however that our views are not far apart.
I owe it to myself though to rephrase my position to try to wrestle it into some semblance of coherence. So, here goes.
We were talking about Government censorship and I feel that Merkel's position was quite the opposite of that. She was concerned that a private platform had the power to unilaterally cut off a man that speaks for 70 million Americans. We should here also recognize that Twitter functioned as the Pied Piper for all the other platforms who now felt safe to also ban the Trumpeter from their platform.
While we could like the resulting Trumpless silence, as I strongly suspect Merkel does too, we never make rules and legislation for situations where we like the outcome or when the decision maker is on our side. We make them for when the decisions are made by people that we do not like. So that, even if we don't like the decision, we can still accept that they were consistent and according to law and order. That might hearken back to Merkel's recognition of her country's dark past, by the way.
I can sympathize with that sentiment and I think that the situation bears thinking about.
Yes I know, weak tea "Let's think about something". Not a clarion call to action but it's all I got.
On the post: Irony: German Chancellor Merkel Upset At Twitter For Banning Trump; Meanwhile Germany Demands Social Media Blocks Dangerous Content
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Not a fan of history I'm guessing
Not a big fan of letting Nazi's fester out of sight.
Neither am I a big believer in the unlimited magic of the free market to fix everything. Making profit is a healthy driver. Up to a point.
On the post: Irony: German Chancellor Merkel Upset At Twitter For Banning Trump; Meanwhile Germany Demands Social Media Blocks Dangerous Content
Re: Re: Re: Not a fan of history I'm guessing
If people took the time to research and choose the platforms that best met their needs, we wouldn't be in the state of false dilemma where either a corporation or government has to make the choice for you.
Not quite. I can make a conscious decision to not go on Parler (and I did) but that still doesn't mean we, as a society, should allow everything that went on there. At the same time hypothetically a situation could arise where a platform is so powerful that you'd have a hard time avoiding it. If they started to moderate certain speech, potentially disadvantaging certain groups, that might be something that we, as a society, might not want either.
(note: I specifically mentioned spectrum, indicating that I don't feel that it's a "dilemma", so an either-or decision. I think there must be a system of checks and balances but I'm not smart enough to think of a system that would work)
On the post: Irony: German Chancellor Merkel Upset At Twitter For Banning Trump; Meanwhile Germany Demands Social Media Blocks Dangerous Content
Re: Not a fan of history I'm guessing
I think you'd be guessing wrong. I'm confident she's acutely aware of German's history, especially since she was born in East Germany.
Despite its history though, Germans have a fundamentally different view of Government from Americans. Americans see government interference as inherently bad and something that must be limited as much as possible. Germans have a more benevolent look of central government where a high level of government involvement is required but you do need to ensure that the involvement is done in the proper way.
(Yes, the "positions" are exaggerated and don't account for a wide range of opinions existing in both countries but as shorthand I think they will serve)
Which now brings me to how I interpreted what she said. What I heard was that she was concerned that private companies have the kind of power that can switch off whole political organizations. A concern I've heard from many sides. In a more German (Merkel) view companies shouldn't have this kind of power but it should belong to a (benevolent) government.
It's a not unreasonable position to hold, regardless of your county's history. It's also not unreasonable to say you don't want governments to have that kind of power. To be honest I'm uncertain where I fall on this spectrum. It seems companies shouldn't act as our National Keeper of Morals but governments can also not be trusted unconditionally.
On the post: Politics Is Not A Game
Re: Re: THEY WERE OPPRESSED AMERICANSS PATRIOTS!
THESE PATRIOTS CONSISTED OF REGULAR AMERICANS CARRYING THE AMERICAN FLAG
Well, some of them were more into other flags:
https://twitter.com/BrandiLynn4Ever/status/1347046798926471175
and:
https://twitter.com/lindy li/status/1347378629903314944
On the post: Trump Appoints Unqualified Guy Who Hates Section 230 To Top Justice Department Role
Re: 'Is he in the cult? Yes? That's all that's required.'
When it comes to Trump's GOP
I don't get the idea that Trump will be the next kingmaker in the GOP. Rubio and Cruz seem to be betting on that, as well as this this guy Candeub.
In the last 4 years Trump has shown that he has the attention span of a mayfly with ADHD (see: TikTok ban), plus it seem pretty clear he didn't really want to be president, he just wanted to masturbate his ego. Also, he expects fealty but he doesn't return loyalty.
So, the idea that he will be supporting your run for president (except perhaps Ivanka) or that he will keep supporting your career, seems speculative at best but is more likely delusional. Once he's no longer president and there is no "Legal Defense Money" flowing in anymore, he'll look for other ways to make money or get the attention he craves. God knows what that will be but I feel somebody else's interests do not figure highly in that equation.
It's also not like this blind devotion doesn't have any downsides. By espousing his rhetoric, you pretty much make it impossible for you to attract center leaning voters.
On the post: Trump Makes It Official: He's Going To Pull Military Funding, Because Congress Won't Kill The Open Internet
Re: Re: Ah yes, the 'No, you are!' ploy
And it's obviously effective.
The scary bit is that it's even effective in Europe. If you go on Twitter there are many people from Europe repeating claims from Trumpetters about voter fraud, Antifa etc.
If you are a European correspondent for the US just reporting the same as CNN or MSNBC or even Fox, your Twitter feed is overrun by people saying you're a liar, you don't know anything about it and that, like all main stream media, you are in the pay of the dark deep state pedophile cabal that's ruling the world.
I swear that if they were up to their ankles in water in their basement and the msm was claiming their street was flooded, first they would go on 8kun, or where-ever they go nowadays, to check if it isn't some nefarious Soros plot to sell you sump pumps.
On the post: Ajit Pai, Easily The Most Controversial FCC Boss In History, Will Step Down January 20
Dream big?
So, who should be his successor? Who would be the best pick to help the FCC forward?
On the post: Federal Court Says State Regulation That Compels Production Of Code May Violate The First Amendment
Re:
So by this theory, requiring, say, Apple, to create back doors in their software is unconstitutional?
Came here to say exactly that...
On the post: Turkish President Sues Dutch Lawmaker Over A Bunch Of 'Insulting' Tweets
Re:
Not sure what you have but there is no immunity for legislators in The Netherlands. Wilders was/is (not sure where the appeal is) actually on trial for some statements he made during a campaign rally which were deemed racist.
The prime minister already made it quite clear that this will not go far. He didn't exactly use the word "Go fuck yourself" but it was close. Also, to my best knowledge, the law that was referred to in the article was actually abolished as of this year, so I don't think Gollum has a case.
So, what will happen is that Erdogan gives Wilders a fantastic international platform to spread his ideology. Wilders will simply be able to point at Erdogan and yell that he's being suppressed and that it's evidence of Muslim retarded ideology/religion. I predict an additional 5 seats in the polls for dear Geert.
On the post: Nixon Scandal Resulted In A Law To Prevent The Politicization Of Antitrust Cases; Meanwhile Trump Uses His Politicized Antitrust Effort In Campaign Ad
I'm breakin' tech in the hot sun
I broke the law and the law's gone
I broke the law and the law's gone
I needed money 'cause I had none
I broke the law and the law's gone
I broke the law and the law's gone
On the post: Republicans, Who Have Made Sure The Federal Election Commission Can't Do Anything, File A Complaint About Twitter's Moderation Practices
Re: Fox News will get it right
True. They looked at the story before the NY Post had it and didn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole.
On the post: Twitter Attempts To Add A Bit Of Friction In Run Up To The Election
Re: Re: (which you’ve proven you can’t)
What kind of dumb-ass community would say your non-sensical post was insightful?
2 of Stephen's comments on this thread are marked insightful while none of yours are. So, draw your own conclusion. It seems you are too smart for Techdirt, so go away.
On the post: China Micro-Censors The VP Debate In The Most Hamfisted Way
Not the answer you'd like
The question is how long can this authoritarian approach expand before the rubber-band reaches its limits and snaps back on the regime.
Unfortunately probably longer than you might hope. It's a well known fact, for example, that some North Korean defectors still believe that the Kim family is the best thing that happened to Korea. If North Korea is a hell hole that's because of the people that are working against the Kims. They believe that even if they're in South Korea where they should be able to see that's a lie.
That's how powerful propaganda is. Compare that also to the Trumpist army that believes many blatantly untrue things about their savior and messiah, like that he is a successful business man. If they stay in the echo chamber it doesn't mater what the facts are.
I think most Chinese will assume that the government/communist party edited out some lies form Pence about China to protect them and keep their blood pressure in the Zen zone.
On the post: Stop Pretending The Trump GOP Genuinely Cares About Monopoly Power
Follow the money, always follow the money
And there's a long line of journalists and experts who still somehow haven't quite figured that out yet.
All journalist have seen their livelihood threatened because all that sweet advertising money went to big tech. It seems that, regardless of their political leaning, they might not object to seeing facebook et al taken down a notch.
On the post: Take-Two Going To Trial Over Yet Another Tattoo Artist Claiming Copyright On Athlete Bodies
Re: Re:
Just going along with the insanity here:
Could the tattooed person claim the same right that photographers have? They only have copyright on the composition, the way I understand it. Since the size, location on the body and the combination of different images is decided by the person being tattooed (usually), they could claim copyright on the composition?
Of course, this whole case is nuts. However, I can't wait for the first lawsuit over prison tats. "I own your ass!" would have a different meaning if the copyright is granted to the artist.
On the post: Hugo Boss Opposes Artist's 'Be Boss, Be Kind' Trademark For Merch
Re: The epidemic of Nazi ideologies
Has Hugo Boss?
I'd be kind of open to let the past rest in cases where companies produced SS-uniforms 80 years ago. Probably nobody that worked there then, works there now and they changed their idol from Hitler to Mammon, so let it go.
However, recently they did make me annoyed with a commercial that used the word integrity. I can't remember the actual phrasing but they claimed it (integrity) was important. I'd think that, seeing their checkered past, they might steer clear of statements like that.
On the post: 'Make Him A Suspect:' Documents Show Rochester PD's Response To Officers' Killing Of An Unarmed Black Man
Re: Re: Re: 'If you won't do it we will' is never a pretty pictu
That's why it is so shortsighted of the Republicans that they want to replace Ruth Bader Ginsberg with a stock conservative judge.
Not only that. So, the upside for them is minimal, they go from a majority to a larger majority. However, if they make it part of the election they might rile up their base to go voting. I'm pretty sure there is a voter group out there that would hold their nose and vote for Trump again if they could be sure to overturn Roe v. Wade for example.
That and they could maintain a semblance of integrity although that does not seem to be a high priority.
Makes you wonder if they're already convinced they're going to lose...
Next >>