How the product is paid for has nary a thing to do with ground to stand on. The TOS is also meaningless. How the phone company gets their money doesn't matter at all. If a business gets its money via monthly fees or selling your data it matters not.
Just like the phone company which is a monopoly, everybody has standing on social media as it is the modern phone company.
Just because you don't personally do anything on social media doesn't matter either. You are free to not have a phone also. And all your friends and uncles and aunts don't have to have phones.
But if you do have a phone the phone company isn't allowed to prevent you from getting a phone line and they are not permitted to censor your calls nor are they allowed to cancel your phone line because some dipshit in the phone company doesn't like what you say on your phone line.
I don't know where you live, but many many women marry for money, height, status. The data is crystal clear: women don't marry men who make less than they do or have lower status than they do.
Things change in a man's life and often things then change in their wive's desire for them. It's a simple fact of life. Just because you aren't that way (you say) and you don't know anyone who is like that (you say) doesn't mean a thing.
Ma'am, stop arguing against evolutionary psychology: there are valid and simple reasons for female hypergamy. It's seen in humans and in the lower primates who we are most related to (chimpanzees and bonobos).
Because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't so. Believing in fake narratives is what is truly sad.
Many conservatives are scientist, engineers, and in tech as freelancers, so your post is bullshit.
Maybe you should enlighten yourself so that you could stop religiously spouting the discredited idea of a private corp being able to get a monopoly and if you don't like it you can go start something of our own. It's a totally discredited idea that no one except the religious SJW and libertarians still spout.
You are missing it entirely. It's about the Civil Commons. You are stumbling over the false idea that a monopoly, duopoly or monopsony is now the Civil Commons.
It matters not if it is a private company or not. And the phone company can't prevent you from getting a phone line. That is the exact analogy for social media. You get an account and it can't be censored or controlled, just like you get a phone line with no restrictions.
Can people say bad things on their phone lines? Sure. So what? There need to be no restrictions on access or speech on social media.
Re: Re: Get Your Fuck Your Feeling MasterCard Today
I ain't about feelings, dopey. It's about a monopoly/duopoloy crushing speech and thought.
The point of view that you can just go "start up" a "platform" because the gigantic platform that everyone uses doesn't allow you on it is infantile.
It's like saying I had a phone line with the phone company but they listened to my conversations and they kicked me off "their" phone line. So now idiots tell me: just start a phone company and get your own phone line.
It's the same thing. See how that works? I didn't think so. I guess Ron White was right: you just can't fix stupid.
Wow! I don't think I would ever want to read someone's comment who thinks Milo and Alex is bad company.
Maybe you may want to do a re-boot on the meaning of the First Amendment, hoss.
Speech is protected especially unpopular speech. Even the assholes who judge speech their small minds have judged to be bigoted/racist/nazi/misogynist.
That is the whole entire complete point of Free Speech. Wake up. And remember: judge not lest ye be judged, exactly the same way you judge others.
There are drones that are able-bodied? What is a drone? What is able bodied about a drone? Who is a boot licker? He or she liked to lick boots? And there are bootlickers who are racists? And there are boot lickers that are authoritarian? What is an authoritarian?
Do you understand how stupid and insane you sound?
Wow.At this late date, I had no idea that ANYONE on EARTH would try to put forth the idea that the blanket censorship against conservatives was not happening.
A new level of insanity by this writer at Tech Dirt?
Yes, indeed. Tim? Are you stupid or just evil? Which?
Tim? Ever hear of Milo? Alex Jones? All the others? Me?
We all have been banned by social media, Tim.
If I can possibly help you get your illogical head out of your ass, please contact me. I will be happy to help you come back to the reality of censorship of the tech lunatics against free speech.
You have problems with Assange? What exactly are you talking about????
Your essay is infected with mansplaining. It took 8 years for the Federal Government to determine that Assange tried to maybe persuade Manning to maybe try to crack a password, which was not successful? 8 years? If you even consider that to be real? That makes your essay as stupid as the opener: you have problems with Assange.
You aren't dating him, Mike. He's just another journalist. You aren't allowed to have any problems with another journalist, Mike, when they report on facts. Put your "problems" in the dustbin where they belong.
And start defending free speech and jounalism. Redeem yourself, Mike.
The TechDirt Troll is saying stupid shit for why now?
It's obvious that real damages are now common in slanderous nonsense spewed by everyone and his uncle on the left: if you disagree with us you are either homophobic, transphobic, anti-semitic, racist, supremicist, or a deplorable.
You can lose your career, have your accounts terminated, have payment companies refuse to process your followers supporting payments.
What is wrong with you, man? How can you not see what is happening daily?
I am sorry but I cannot reply to an obviously brain-damaged troll, except to say this:
If a person or organization commits blood libel against you, which causes you to loose your livlihood, crushes your ability to make money to support yourself and your family, but because you are classified as a "public figure" you cannot sue and get damages for the real damages you have sufferred at the hands of this mob craziness, is that right?
Why is that right? Why is it right, in your totalitarian world, to destroy a person who has a different opinion?
Moreover, why is it not right to sue the fuck out of a blood libel banshee who has caused you real damages?
The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind. The answer is clear. Listen to it.
For pointing out this wonderful & important opinion by Justice Thomas. Of course, he is completely right.
Especially in this age we find ourselves in where screaming totalitarians brand every view that they disagree with as hate and racism, which then are used to destroy the livlihoods of the totalitarian harpys' victims (via deplatforming, SLPC hate ratings, withdrawal of credit card services, etc., etc.), leaving the injured party unable to fight it off and/or collect damages for the real costs incurred by false hate and racism, etc. charges thrown by irresponsible totalitarians who know they cannot ever face consequences because the person they libel is a "public" person.
We can only hope that Clarence Thomas' wise opinion succeeds in overturning a precedent that was mistaken when it was done and is very mistaken now in this age of internet and academic hate mobs.
Can anyone tell me why Anonymous Coward represents over 50 percent of every comment field at Tech Dirt?
Why on Earth is this troll, trolling? Who would ever read a thing he/she/it has to say, since he/she/it trolls so often that he/she/it clearly is a lunatic.
I really don't understand. Why is Anonymous Coward not being reined in on this blog?
Wake up, Tim, or whoever has finallly woken up to what I told you in the comments a year ago: shutting down Craigslist and Backpage is an attack on prostitution, sex traficking does not exist It's a codeword for prostitution.
Finally you are coming around to a dim understanding. Congrats Now kick dirtbag Anonymous Coward to the curb, k?
I'm really not understanding why you are going on and on about this suit. It's obviously without merit. It has nothing to do with whether the plaintiffs have standing. Trump has 1st Amendment rights. Any challenge to any citizen's 1st Amendment rights is without any merit before any US court This is another stupid piece of nonsense put forth by Trump Derangement Syndrome lunatics. Don't feed the lunatic. Your article is also without merit because it does not deal with the root Free Speech issue clearly delineated by this nonsense. Wake up, Tech Dirt guys.
Yep, just like I told you before. The Sex Trafficking hysteria is just a code word for prostitution. Keep making prostituion illegal, except now call it sex trafficking. In other words, no one would willingly have sex for money, so the only possibility is that they have been trafficked.
This is now and has always been Puritans disguised as feminists pushing anti-prostitution laws disguised as sex trafficking.
Only this time the penalties are multiplied 1000 times.Insanity multiplied.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks for playing.
How the product is paid for has nary a thing to do with ground to stand on. The TOS is also meaningless. How the phone company gets their money doesn't matter at all. If a business gets its money via monthly fees or selling your data it matters not.
Just like the phone company which is a monopoly, everybody has standing on social media as it is the modern phone company.
Just because you don't personally do anything on social media doesn't matter either. You are free to not have a phone also. And all your friends and uncles and aunts don't have to have phones.
But if you do have a phone the phone company isn't allowed to prevent you from getting a phone line and they are not permitted to censor your calls nor are they allowed to cancel your phone line because some dipshit in the phone company doesn't like what you say on your phone line.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Willful Blindness
why is it sad that the writer will be an incel?
Incels are people, too.
I don't know where you live, but many many women marry for money, height, status. The data is crystal clear: women don't marry men who make less than they do or have lower status than they do.
Things change in a man's life and often things then change in their wive's desire for them. It's a simple fact of life. Just because you aren't that way (you say) and you don't know anyone who is like that (you say) doesn't mean a thing.
Ma'am, stop arguing against evolutionary psychology: there are valid and simple reasons for female hypergamy. It's seen in humans and in the lower primates who we are most related to (chimpanzees and bonobos).
Because you don't like it, doesn't mean it isn't so. Believing in fake narratives is what is truly sad.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Productivity has been rising for the past 40 years without a concurrent rise in wages.
It's been said that the true min wage should be at 25/hour based on the productive rise since the late 60s to now.
Time to play some catch up, at least until the robots take over.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Re:
Many conservatives are scientist, engineers, and in tech as freelancers, so your post is bullshit.
Maybe you should enlighten yourself so that you could stop religiously spouting the discredited idea of a private corp being able to get a monopoly and if you don't like it you can go start something of our own. It's a totally discredited idea that no one except the religious SJW and libertarians still spout.
Wake up.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Re:
You are missing it entirely. It's about the Civil Commons. You are stumbling over the false idea that a monopoly, duopoly or monopsony is now the Civil Commons.
It matters not if it is a private company or not. And the phone company can't prevent you from getting a phone line. That is the exact analogy for social media. You get an account and it can't be censored or controlled, just like you get a phone line with no restrictions.
Can people say bad things on their phone lines? Sure. So what? There need to be no restrictions on access or speech on social media.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Thanks for playing.
Did you think that whether I pay for social media or not mattered at all to anything or anyone?
Yeah, thought so.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Thanks for playing.
Au contraire, mon frere. They are public forums.
And there goes your argument whatever it was.
The social media monopolies are the phone company of the 21st century.
You get a phone line without question. You don't get your calls monitored to make sure you aren't "triggering" some idiot in his mother's basement.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Get Your Fuck Your Feeling MasterCard Today
I ain't about feelings, dopey. It's about a monopoly/duopoloy crushing speech and thought.
The point of view that you can just go "start up" a "platform" because the gigantic platform that everyone uses doesn't allow you on it is infantile.
It's like saying I had a phone line with the phone company but they listened to my conversations and they kicked me off "their" phone line. So now idiots tell me: just start a phone company and get your own phone line.
It's the same thing. See how that works? I didn't think so. I guess Ron White was right: you just can't fix stupid.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Wow! I don't think I would ever want to read someone's comment who thinks Milo and Alex is bad company.
Maybe you may want to do a re-boot on the meaning of the First Amendment, hoss.
Speech is protected especially unpopular speech. Even the assholes who judge speech their small minds have judged to be bigoted/racist/nazi/misogynist.
That is the whole entire complete point of Free Speech. Wake up. And remember: judge not lest ye be judged, exactly the same way you judge others.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re: Re: Have you tried not being a badge bunny?
There are drones that are able-bodied? What is a drone? What is able bodied about a drone? Who is a boot licker? He or she liked to lick boots? And there are bootlickers who are racists? And there are boot lickers that are authoritarian? What is an authoritarian?
Do you understand how stupid and insane you sound?
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Re:
So you are against free speech? Wow. I thought your people cared about Free Speech. Ok, understood: you hate Free Speech.
On the post: White House Sets Up Echo Chamber For Complaints About Social Media Bias Against Conservatives
Willful Blindness
Wow.At this late date, I had no idea that ANYONE on EARTH would try to put forth the idea that the blanket censorship against conservatives was not happening.
A new level of insanity by this writer at Tech Dirt?
Yes, indeed. Tim? Are you stupid or just evil? Which?
Tim? Ever hear of Milo? Alex Jones? All the others? Me?
We all have been banned by social media, Tim.
If I can possibly help you get your illogical head out of your ass, please contact me. I will be happy to help you come back to the reality of censorship of the tech lunatics against free speech.
On the post: Julian Assange Arrested On Behalf Of The US, For Trying To Help Manning Crack CIA Password
What on Earth are you Talking about?
You have problems with Assange? What exactly are you talking about????
Your essay is infected with mansplaining. It took 8 years for the Federal Government to determine that Assange tried to maybe persuade Manning to maybe try to crack a password, which was not successful? 8 years? If you even consider that to be real? That makes your essay as stupid as the opener: you have problems with Assange.
You aren't dating him, Mike. He's just another journalist. You aren't allowed to have any problems with another journalist, Mike, when they report on facts. Put your "problems" in the dustbin where they belong.
And start defending free speech and jounalism. Redeem yourself, Mike.
On the post: Justice Thomas Is Apparently Serious About Completely Upturning Over 50 Years Of 1st Amendment Law
Re: Re: Thank You
Are you being paid in stupidity or cupidity?
The TechDirt Troll is saying stupid shit for why now?
It's obvious that real damages are now common in slanderous nonsense spewed by everyone and his uncle on the left: if you disagree with us you are either homophobic, transphobic, anti-semitic, racist, supremicist, or a deplorable.
You can lose your career, have your accounts terminated, have payment companies refuse to process your followers supporting payments.
What is wrong with you, man? How can you not see what is happening daily?
On the post: Justice Thomas Is Apparently Serious About Completely Upturning Over 50 Years Of 1st Amendment Law
Re: Re: Thank You
I am sorry but I cannot reply to an obviously brain-damaged troll, except to say this:
If a person or organization commits blood libel against you, which causes you to loose your livlihood, crushes your ability to make money to support yourself and your family, but because you are classified as a "public figure" you cannot sue and get damages for the real damages you have sufferred at the hands of this mob craziness, is that right?
Why is that right? Why is it right, in your totalitarian world, to destroy a person who has a different opinion?
Moreover, why is it not right to sue the fuck out of a blood libel banshee who has caused you real damages?
The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind. The answer is clear. Listen to it.
Listen more; troll less.
On the post: Justice Thomas Is Apparently Serious About Completely Upturning Over 50 Years Of 1st Amendment Law
Thank You
For pointing out this wonderful & important opinion by Justice Thomas. Of course, he is completely right.
Especially in this age we find ourselves in where screaming totalitarians brand every view that they disagree with as hate and racism, which then are used to destroy the livlihoods of the totalitarian harpys' victims (via deplatforming, SLPC hate ratings, withdrawal of credit card services, etc., etc.), leaving the injured party unable to fight it off and/or collect damages for the real costs incurred by false hate and racism, etc. charges thrown by irresponsible totalitarians who know they cannot ever face consequences because the person they libel is a "public" person.
We can only hope that Clarence Thomas' wise opinion succeeds in overturning a precedent that was mistaken when it was done and is very mistaken now in this age of internet and academic hate mobs.
On the post: New Study Says The Removal Of Craigslist Erotic Services Pages May Be Linked To An Increase In Murdered Females
Anonymous Coward
Can anyone tell me why Anonymous Coward represents over 50 percent of every comment field at Tech Dirt?
Why on Earth is this troll, trolling? Who would ever read a thing he/she/it has to say, since he/she/it trolls so often that he/she/it clearly is a lunatic.
I really don't understand. Why is Anonymous Coward not being reined in on this blog?
Wake up, Tim, or whoever has finallly woken up to what I told you in the comments a year ago: shutting down Craigslist and Backpage is an attack on prostitution, sex traficking does not exist It's a codeword for prostitution.
Finally you are coming around to a dim understanding. Congrats Now kick dirtbag Anonymous Coward to the curb, k?
On the post: PEN America Sues Donald Trump For 1st Amendment Violations In Attacking The Press
Wtf?
It's obviously without merit. It has nothing to do with whether the plaintiffs have standing.
Trump has 1st Amendment rights. Any challenge to any citizen's 1st Amendment rights is without any merit before any US court
This is another stupid piece of nonsense put forth by Trump Derangement Syndrome lunatics.
Don't feed the lunatic. Your article is also without merit because it does not deal with the root Free Speech issue clearly delineated by this nonsense.
Wake up, Tech Dirt guys.
On the post: 'Missing, Sex Trafficked' Children Neither Missing, Nor Victims Of Sex Trafficking
Yep.
This is now and has always been Puritans disguised as feminists pushing anti-prostitution laws disguised as sex trafficking.
Only this time the penalties are multiplied 1000 times.Insanity multiplied.
On the post: In Which A Bunch Of Us Try To Explain The 1st Amendment To Jeff Sessions Concerning 'Social Media Bias'
The Problem with your Article
Next >>