You know what might give him some peace, and that is stop looking for that video. Like many a crusader created by a tragic event, he has developed a compulsion which leads to continuously reliving the event.
Alledgedly Rape/domestic violence victims cant be jailed as material witnesess BECAUSE a woman in Lousiana, a DV victim, was jailed for a week as a material witness without being served a subpoena ever and was thrown out a week later after her abuser took a plea deal and she was never called to testify.
Never Subopenaed
Jailed: Ie: Stripped searched, allegedly physically abused by guards, AS a WITNESS
Then: Never called to testify.
Prosecutors want wins, not justice, not truth
The system itself is predatory
Woman's last name with Singleton, google it. It happened.
"This puts limitations on proprietary owners as to choices they can make in utilities."
Yes, and that's where "libertarianism" suddenly shifts from people making their own decisions to people being forced to use more expensive and inferior services because it suits someone else. It's strange to me that it always seems to boil down to instead of individual freedom, it's always down to what some local clique has decided is best for their own pocket even if it damages everyone else's.
"Very few flat out block an alternative service choice"
Again, I'm only asking because where I live there's usually multiple services available, and you have a choice of ISP service even if the last mile infrastructure only comes from one provider. From my understand of the state of things in the US, because the monopolies have been retained instead of being dismantled by things like local loop unbundling and separating the service from the physical cable, people don't generally have that choice. Which doesn't exactly seem like the best choice for all, especially in areas where the average person can't actually buy property on the average wage.
"You know, or should have known, your options when you sign the rental contract."
Which is great, assuming options never change after you sign the contract or monopolies are so tight that you never have a choice of apartment building that's not under the same monopoly. It's great when people have a real choice of where to live and the ISP is a negotiating tool in that, but if you need somewhere to live and everyone's tied to the same monopoly because all the building owners have been bought, then that supposed choice becomes moot.
I wouldn't call banning people who (might) make fun of or them something every website needs to do. In fact I would say the opposite is true. Retaliating against criticism, humorous or otherwise, is a major red flag.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Some AI generated works shouldn't be public
"How is software any different?"
Because software that's actually in use is not in a fixed format. Unless you're using something that's truly obsolete, software is built on and remodelled all the time, which can range from fixing bugs to adding new features or even a complete rewrite of the engine under the hood. While this is happening, certain rules need to be applied as to how people interact with and (most importantly) release their changes in line with what everyone else is using, which requires licensing.
There's some similarities to other types of content on a superficial basis, but once you start talking about the code and not a compiled end binary, those similarities soon end.
how many DNA samples collected to eliminate someone from enquiries have also been added to the database? What about other opportunities to gather DNA, such as blood from accident victims, has that been used to expand the database?
Imposter accounts are disallowed on the service. Perhaps the real guy would have a claim to the name, but not an impersonator.
The terms of service say that you can't impersonate another user or person. Creating an account on TS based on a user on Twitter doesn't violate that.
This looks like a violation of section 10.7. I'm sure he can have his opinion on vaccines. He just can't issue death threats.
"Looks" being the operative word. "These people should be executed" is no more a threat of death than "These people should be arrested" is a threat of incarceration.
So far, these cases are based on objective rules violations, and not political disagreement.
The violations are not objective when no reason has been given, and you made up the violations to suit your argument.
For now, Truth has a superior moderation format.
They're literally doing the same thing other platforms are doing.
that may be a difference between the original Bike and the Bike+. The original Bike resistance is a purely mechanical knob that controls the physical distance between magnets, you don't even need power to the bike for that to work.
If you have a Bike+, that has the feature for programmatic control of resistance and it sounds like that makes the resistance level software controlled rather than mechanical.
For the occasional Internet, power, or Peloton server outage sounds like that's an advantage of the original / lower cost bike.
Nobody has said they're not allowed to do this.
It's in no way just a technicality.
People are just pointing out that TS is climbing the moderation learning curve pretty quickly.
...and some people are. While expressing their reasons to others while doing so. Some of these people are paying customers, some are artists who feel they can no longer have a business relationship with Spotify. Which is not a problem.
But nobody else can get them. Nobody else can see them demonstrated or study them. History is preserved better with artifacts, less so with "when Ah were a lad Ah played this game called Zelda, but nothing has been allowed to play it for 50 years..."
I love the way you're still arguing and presenting less than 70 tapes a month as being a significant win.
This is the very definition of a niche market, and the attempt to capture that market via a short run of a title that sells way more on DVD is the definition of a gimmick.
Of course there's a market. But, the current market probably doesn't even cover breakages on the typical DVD run, and DVD is dying apart from a niche market itself.
The function of the Police is to present prosecutable cases to their local DA's.
There are officers that want to help people & prevent crime and all that kinda fuzzy feel good stuff, but that is 100% subordinate to building & presenting cases to the DA to prosecute, at the Law Enforcement Officer's (LEO) discretion.
Anytime anyone interfaces with an LEO in any way they may be implicated in a crime & prosecuted for that crime.
If you feel we don't live in a police state you are living in a dream world, wake TF up.
Subjective banning based on political difference is not good faith moderation, and is unprotected.
Moderation is community curation; if a community (or its “leader”) decides the community is better off without certain political opinions being expressed in its community, they’re allowed to say so and ban anyone who expresses that opinion. The law—as in, both the First Amendment and Section 230—protect that decision.
Also: Which “political differences” are you referring to here, Koby? Be specific.
"Many have no clue just how integrated the modern computer systems in vehicles are."
Sure, but again it's down to which part fails. There shouldn't be any reason why a car would fail on any of its fundamental system because the central console dies, since the main purpose of that is to provide feedback to the driver and provide optional functions.
"There’s no manual override for any of the infotainment or comfort offerings.
Heated items are controlled by apps. Seat positions. Security settings. Safety. All apps."
Some of those things are not like the others. I haven't driver any of the cars you mention so it seems weird to me that things like seat positions can't be controlled manually, and that's is a safety concern. But, there's a vast difference between someone not being able to heat their seat or a mirror until they get a service and actual safety features going down because a screen is no longer available.
On the post: No, Creating An NFT Of The Video Of A Horrific Shooting Will Not Get It Removed From The Internet
You know what might give him some peace, and that is stop looking for that video. Like many a crusader created by a tragic event, he has developed a compulsion which leads to continuously reliving the event.
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Wait…
I'm only basing my opinion on what you're previously said here.
"I think Ukraine is a dictatorship at far greater risk and threat to the world than anyone else.
"I think Ukraine is a dictatorship at far greater risk and threat to the world than anyone else."
Da, comrade.
"I do not know where he stands."
He's literally talked about it in the last 48 hours.
"I blame Clinton"
Of course you do...
On the post: San Francisco Cops Are Running Rape Victims' DNA Through Criminal Databases Because What Even The Fuck
Re: All'yall should know this by now...
Alledgedly Rape/domestic violence victims cant be jailed as material witnesess BECAUSE a woman in Lousiana, a DV victim, was jailed for a week as a material witness without being served a subpoena ever and was thrown out a week later after her abuser took a plea deal and she was never called to testify.
Never Subopenaed
Jailed: Ie: Stripped searched, allegedly physically abused by guards, AS a WITNESS
Then: Never called to testify.
Prosecutors want wins, not justice, not truth
The system itself is predatory
Woman's last name with Singleton, google it. It happened.
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why do self-proclaimed "libertarians" always end up resorting to comments about how incest and age of consent laws are optional? It's a weird trend.
On the post: 15 Years Late, The FCC Cracks Down On Broadband Apartment Monopolies
Re: Re: Re: Is this actually a good thing?
"This puts limitations on proprietary owners as to choices they can make in utilities."
Yes, and that's where "libertarianism" suddenly shifts from people making their own decisions to people being forced to use more expensive and inferior services because it suits someone else. It's strange to me that it always seems to boil down to instead of individual freedom, it's always down to what some local clique has decided is best for their own pocket even if it damages everyone else's.
"Very few flat out block an alternative service choice"
Again, I'm only asking because where I live there's usually multiple services available, and you have a choice of ISP service even if the last mile infrastructure only comes from one provider. From my understand of the state of things in the US, because the monopolies have been retained instead of being dismantled by things like local loop unbundling and separating the service from the physical cable, people don't generally have that choice. Which doesn't exactly seem like the best choice for all, especially in areas where the average person can't actually buy property on the average wage.
"You know, or should have known, your options when you sign the rental contract."
Which is great, assuming options never change after you sign the contract or monopolies are so tight that you never have a choice of apartment building that's not under the same monopoly. It's great when people have a real choice of where to live and the ISP is a negotiating tool in that, but if you need somewhere to live and everyone's tied to the same monopoly because all the building owners have been bought, then that supposed choice becomes moot.
On the post: San Francisco Cops Are Running Rape Victims' DNA Through Criminal Databases Because What Even The Fuck
If they were smart...
If they had been smart they could have just found her name, and then used good old fashioned police work to try and link her to it without the DNA.
I wouldn't even call that fruit from a poisoned tree. Just don't use the DNA at all, but a parallel investigation.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
I wouldn't call banning people who (might) make fun of or them something every website needs to do. In fact I would say the opposite is true. Retaliating against criticism, humorous or otherwise, is a major red flag.
On the post: US Copyright Office Gets It Right (Again): AI-Generated Works Do Not Get A Copyright Monopoly
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Some AI generated works shouldn't be public
"How is software any different?"
Because software that's actually in use is not in a fixed format. Unless you're using something that's truly obsolete, software is built on and remodelled all the time, which can range from fixing bugs to adding new features or even a complete rewrite of the engine under the hood. While this is happening, certain rules need to be applied as to how people interact with and (most importantly) release their changes in line with what everyone else is using, which requires licensing.
There's some similarities to other types of content on a superficial basis, but once you start talking about the code and not a compiled end binary, those similarities soon end.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
Re: Re: Re:
That wasn't the point. The point was that it's not because of section 230 that they can ban users, as the person I responded to stated.
On the post: San Francisco Cops Are Running Rape Victims' DNA Through Criminal Databases Because What Even The Fuck
Re:
All of them, son.
All of them.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
Re: Clearly
The terms of service say that you can't impersonate another user or person. Creating an account on TS based on a user on Twitter doesn't violate that.
"Looks" being the operative word. "These people should be executed" is no more a threat of death than "These people should be arrested" is a threat of incarceration.
The violations are not objective when no reason has been given, and you made up the violations to suit your argument.
They're literally doing the same thing other platforms are doing.
On the post: Peloton Outage Prevents Customers From Using $2,500 Exercise Bikes
Re: Re:
that may be a difference between the original Bike and the Bike+. The original Bike resistance is a purely mechanical knob that controls the physical distance between magnets, you don't even need power to the bike for that to work.
If you have a Bike+, that has the feature for programmatic control of resistance and it sounds like that makes the resistance level software controlled rather than mechanical.
For the occasional Internet, power, or Peloton server outage sounds like that's an advantage of the original / lower cost bike.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
Re: Re:
Nobody has said they're not allowed to do this.
It's in no way just a technicality.
People are just pointing out that TS is climbing the moderation learning curve pretty quickly.
On the post: How Our Convoluted Copyright Regime Explains Why Spotify Chose Joe Rogan Over Neil Young
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"If you don’t like it go elsewhere."
...and some people are. While expressing their reasons to others while doing so. Some of these people are paying customers, some are artists who feel they can no longer have a business relationship with Spotify. Which is not a problem.
On the post: Video Game History Foundation: Nintendo Actions 'Actively Destructive To Video Game History'
Re: Nintendo shutter unprofitable virtual console
But nobody else can get them. Nobody else can see them demonstrated or study them. History is preserved better with artifacts, less so with "when Ah were a lad Ah played this game called Zelda, but nothing has been allowed to play it for 50 years..."
On the post: Analog Books Go From Strength To Strength: Helped, Not Hindered, By The Digital World
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Don
I love the way you're still arguing and presenting less than 70 tapes a month as being a significant win.
This is the very definition of a niche market, and the attempt to capture that market via a short run of a title that sells way more on DVD is the definition of a gimmick.
Of course there's a market. But, the current market probably doesn't even cover breakages on the typical DVD run, and DVD is dying apart from a niche market itself.
On the post: San Francisco Cops Are Running Rape Victims' DNA Through Criminal Databases Because What Even The Fuck
All'yall should know this by now...
The function of the Police is to present prosecutable cases to their local DA's.
There are officers that want to help people & prevent crime and all that kinda fuzzy feel good stuff, but that is 100% subordinate to building & presenting cases to the DA to prosecute, at the Law Enforcement Officer's (LEO) discretion.
Anytime anyone interfaces with an LEO in any way they may be implicated in a crime & prosecuted for that crime.
If you feel we don't live in a police state you are living in a dream world, wake TF up.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
Moderation is community curation; if a community (or its “leader”) decides the community is better off without certain political opinions being expressed in its community, they’re allowed to say so and ban anyone who expresses that opinion. The law—as in, both the First Amendment and Section 230—protect that decision.
Also: Which “political differences” are you referring to here, Koby? Be specific.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
Re:
Technically, they're allowed to do this because of the first amendment.
On the post: Seattle Public Radio Station Manages To Partially Brick Area Mazdas Using Nothing More Than Some Image Files
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Weighted fault
"Many have no clue just how integrated the modern computer systems in vehicles are."
Sure, but again it's down to which part fails. There shouldn't be any reason why a car would fail on any of its fundamental system because the central console dies, since the main purpose of that is to provide feedback to the driver and provide optional functions.
"There’s no manual override for any of the infotainment or comfort offerings.
Heated items are controlled by apps. Seat positions. Security settings. Safety. All apps."
Some of those things are not like the others. I haven't driver any of the cars you mention so it seems weird to me that things like seat positions can't be controlled manually, and that's is a safety concern. But, there's a vast difference between someone not being able to heat their seat or a mirror until they get a service and actual safety features going down because a screen is no longer available.
Next >>