This is the point where the conversation ends: I ask for evidence that conservatives were singled out for conservative positions that are not also incitement or hate speech.
And usually that's when the dialogue ends.
Because either conservative censorship is not a thing, or it is a thing because the conservatism in question is too spicy for Twitter (and for Amazon, Apple and Google), which suggests to me it's at the seasoning level of 4chan/b or 4chan/pol.
But then you can go there and get your spicy vitriol, hate and incitement on. And your brethren will listen. In fact some of the greatest internet crowdsourced mischief started from those place.
So you're totally not being censored, you're just being sent to the part of the beach that is clothes-optional.
Someone who kills people is murderer.
Someone who assaults people† enough to injure them is an attempted murderer.
Someone who does property damage is a vandal.
If that damage involves fire or explosions, he's an arsonist.
Someone who does property damage that halts important processes is a saboteur.
I'm pretty sure all these classifications are actionable by the justice system even before we decide what they did was terrorism.
So yeah, I get it, but I'm still pretty sure that we'd be safe by deciding killing civilians was the threshold.
† This always bothered me about Batman who routinely beats people up (thugs at that) within an inch of their lives and failing to render first aid. The only reason he sustains a code against killing with a record like that is author appeal. In reality, some folk would die after a Batman-beating. And Batman would have do deal with both emotional and legal consequences for their death.
I've mentioned it on other TD forums. The GOP is, I submit, a hierarchy of chumps in which each tier is playing a confidence game on the tiers directly below them, who are grifting those below them, and so on.
It explains why so many posters on these forums are so insistent about their outrageous claims, such as the proof of fraud during the general election (but only the presidential election) and how Antifa caused all the violence at the Capitol building last Wednesday.
According to these guys, their job is to sucker anyone beneath them in their own social hierarchy so they spout obvious untruths and insist they are veritable, just as their dear leader does to them (while passing policy entirely against their civic interests.)
Yeah, the woke-mob likes the speech part of the first amendment. Much higher on the woke-mob's priority list is coming around door-to-door to collect your guns, which you've been waiting for since the 1970s and hasn't happened yet.
They may criminalize buying and selling assault rifles (but curiously not battle rifles or hunting rifles) but until they actually come around to collect them, I don't think your speech will be limited any more than it is already.
I don't think Republicans can feasibly conceive of equality. They want only Republican content to be hosted, and for all non-Republican content to be restricted.
Around the time Apple refused to put Binding of Isaac on the iPhone because it might offend some people, it came out the Apple app certification management had some rather prudish attitudes about what can go on iOS devices, assuring that LGBT+ interests, minority interests and counterculture interests will be underrepresented on the Apple Store. Those stories are here in the backlog of Techdirt.
When it comes to the interface experience iOS ≠ Android. I know some people use iPhones specifically because they don't like aspects of Android or grew up with iOS and don't want to relearn their phone.
Of course, one can jailbreak iOS. It's risky and probably a troubleshooting chore.
Is there a an iOS-style shell for Android to make an Android phone behave like iOS? That would solve some of the problems.
Also, I'd like to be able to play FTL and Slay the Spire on my Android devices. Both titles are iOS only.
Considering how many law enforcement services were on friendly terms with Trump and the White House, it would not surprise me at all if online communications promises to stand down or even to take up arms alongside the insurgency are uncovered in the near future.
I'm pretty sure if civil war broke out, the DHS subdivisions and a whole lot of sheriffs would join up with the Trump Confederacy.
Paypal (who didn't have many competitors at the time) cutting off Wikileaks when it published embarrassing data about US administrations (including torture stuff and extrajudicial detentions) informing the US public about things its government was doing.
And Germany's recent effort to stop the distribution of Blueleaks by seizing the physical drives that hosted the data for Distributed Denial of Secrets. The data was restored via alternative (and more obfuscated) host servers.
Content moderation at the infrastructure layer has been happening for a long time now, typically to prevent the public from accessing secrets about criminal activity by government officials.
Here in the states, there are mental hospitals attached to penal complexes, but we otherwise don't have special hospitals for people insane enough to commit crimes. Inpatients are given padded rooms only if they're a threat to themselves. And are sedated when the nurses find them too annoying. Jeffrey Dahmer types are super rare.
For those of us crazies on the outside, on the rare occasion that someone is insane and wants to commit a crime, we have crisis councilors to talk them through the moment until they realize their plan is probably not such a good idea.
It's like Suicide Prevention, except it's also for I am going to stab my abusive boyfriend. or I am so filled with rage I am going to start a very large fire. Also Suicide Prevention volunteers aren't trained for that stuff, or really, I've discovered, for people who are serious about killing themselves.
I seriously doubt Whitehat above is self-aware enough to get assessed, let alone diagnosed and treated. It means that when he does commit a crime on account of his... interpretation of reality, he will not be afforded the benefit of doubt that comes with diminished capacity and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
It's a shame because he screams his indoctrination and radicalization, and probably should seek help before he goes and shoots up a church.
(Dan White and the reprisal from the Twinkie Defense made insanity pleas nearly useless throughout the US, even for those of us who have diagnoses.)
anyone who challenges the vote of an election (which is absolutely allowed by the constitution) [would be a coup d'etat]
The Constitution doesn't allow for military or violent challenges to the election. Litigation, yes. Strong-arm assault, no. The Wednesday assault was violent. New revelations are showing it was significantly violent. Discussions on Parler have revealed that there were directions to use force. Materials brought by the raiding crowd indicate an intent to use deadly force.
Not just the pipe bombs.
Complain here all you like, but judges and juries will decide if the attack should be described as a coup d'etat, and what an appropriate punishment should be.
It's a good thing there are tons of photos and video footage.
Regional blocking is usually due to state laws and policies and it's based on where you are.
And yes it gets legally-gray if your region's internet needs are only served by Comcast, and Comcast decides you can't use a given website (and blocks it). But we're not supposed to have regional monopolies in the US. That's also the point of net neutrality (which Trump's guy Ajit Pai was glad to nix).
Of course these are about receiving content, not about posting or publishing content.
Law Enforcement is limited when it comes to restricting what you can say, but no website is required to host what you say.
Yes, a lot of evidence has emerged since I wrote my first objection to the word, above.
I still don't like the word, as we really like to use Terrorist to mean anyone the administration doesn't like (for instance applied to asylum seekers approaching the Mexican-American border, and protestors in Portland).
But I will concur in this case there were evident terrorists within the crowd that stormed the US Capitol on January 6th.
For the internet, maybe, but not for the Twitter service on the web.
You could suggest that a state or federal government make a public Twitter service that goes by a maximum-free-speech policy. But when it comes to social programs, I'd prioritize universal healthcare and food access.
When I discovered there's a Chinese food restaurant named Translation Server Error I decided that place needs to be a favorite noodle spot in my Cyberpunk fictional world.
On the post: Small Idaho ISP 'Punishes' Twitter And Facebook's 'Censorship' ... By Blocking Access To Them Entirely
Examples? Evidence?
This is the point where the conversation ends: I ask for evidence that conservatives were singled out for conservative positions that are not also incitement or hate speech.
And usually that's when the dialogue ends.
Because either conservative censorship is not a thing, or it is a thing because the conservatism in question is too spicy for Twitter (and for Amazon, Apple and Google), which suggests to me it's at the seasoning level of 4chan/b or 4chan/pol.
But then you can go there and get your spicy vitriol, hate and incitement on. And your brethren will listen. In fact some of the greatest internet crowdsourced mischief started from those place.
So you're totally not being censored, you're just being sent to the part of the beach that is clothes-optional.
On the post: Wednesday, January 6th: The Day The Game Of Politics Turned Into Insurrection
pretending people are not terrorists
Someone who kills people is murderer.
Someone who assaults people† enough to injure them is an attempted murderer.
Someone who does property damage is a vandal.
If that damage involves fire or explosions, he's an arsonist.
Someone who does property damage that halts important processes is a saboteur.
I'm pretty sure all these classifications are actionable by the justice system even before we decide what they did was terrorism.
So yeah, I get it, but I'm still pretty sure that we'd be safe by deciding killing civilians was the threshold.
† This always bothered me about Batman who routinely beats people up (thugs at that) within an inch of their lives and failing to render first aid. The only reason he sustains a code against killing with a record like that is author appeal. In reality, some folk would die after a Batman-beating. And Batman would have do deal with both emotional and legal consequences for their death.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Hierarchy of Chumps
I've mentioned it on other TD forums. The GOP is, I submit, a hierarchy of chumps in which each tier is playing a confidence game on the tiers directly below them, who are grifting those below them, and so on.
It explains why so many posters on these forums are so insistent about their outrageous claims, such as the proof of fraud during the general election (but only the presidential election) and how Antifa caused all the violence at the Capitol building last Wednesday.
According to these guys, their job is to sucker anyone beneath them in their own social hierarchy so they spout obvious untruths and insist they are veritable, just as their dear leader does to them (while passing policy entirely against their civic interests.)
On the post: The Slope Gets More Slippery As You Expect Content Moderation To Happen At The Infrastructure Layer
"if the woke mob disagrees then censorship"
Yeah, the woke-mob likes the speech part of the first amendment. Much higher on the woke-mob's priority list is coming around door-to-door to collect your guns, which you've been waiting for since the 1970s and hasn't happened yet.
They may criminalize buying and selling assault rifles (but curiously not battle rifles or hunting rifles) but until they actually come around to collect them, I don't think your speech will be limited any more than it is already.
On the post: Everything Pundits Are Getting Wrong About This Current Moment In Content Moderation
Killing net neutrality
I don't think Republicans can feasibly conceive of equality. They want only Republican content to be hosted, and for all non-Republican content to be restricted.
On the post: Everything Pundits Are Getting Wrong About This Current Moment In Content Moderation
Apple's Walled Garden
Around the time Apple refused to put Binding of Isaac on the iPhone because it might offend some people, it came out the Apple app certification management had some rather prudish attitudes about what can go on iOS devices, assuring that LGBT+ interests, minority interests and counterculture interests will be underrepresented on the Apple Store. Those stories are here in the backlog of Techdirt.
When it comes to the interface experience iOS ≠ Android. I know some people use iPhones specifically because they don't like aspects of Android or grew up with iOS and don't want to relearn their phone.
Of course, one can jailbreak iOS. It's risky and probably a troubleshooting chore.
Is there a an iOS-style shell for Android to make an Android phone behave like iOS? That would solve some of the problems.
Also, I'd like to be able to play FTL and Slay the Spire on my Android devices. Both titles are iOS only.
On the post: Everything Pundits Are Getting Wrong About This Current Moment In Content Moderation
The subdued police presence
Considering how many law enforcement services were on friendly terms with Trump and the White House, it would not surprise me at all if online communications promises to stand down or even to take up arms alongside the insurgency are uncovered in the near future.
I'm pretty sure if civil war broke out, the DHS subdivisions and a whole lot of sheriffs would join up with the Trump Confederacy.
On the post: As Predicted: Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like
"so you all can go SUCK it"
Seriously, do you guys just swig half a bottle of Jack before posting?
Posts like this one make you sound like someone who can't uphold a job and kicks your dog out of general frustration.
Trump is toxic, to the US and to people like you.
On the post: The Slope Gets More Slippery As You Expect Content Moderation To Happen At The Infrastructure Layer
I can't help but think about...
Paypal (who didn't have many competitors at the time) cutting off Wikileaks when it published embarrassing data about US administrations (including torture stuff and extrajudicial detentions) informing the US public about things its government was doing.
And Germany's recent effort to stop the distribution of Blueleaks by seizing the physical drives that hosted the data for Distributed Denial of Secrets. The data was restored via alternative (and more obfuscated) host servers.
Content moderation at the infrastructure layer has been happening for a long time now, typically to prevent the public from accessing secrets about criminal activity by government officials.
On the post: Everything Pundits Are Getting Wrong About This Current Moment In Content Moderation
4. "This is communism!"
I think in this case communism is being used as a generic insult the way gay and terrorist have been used for years.
It means This is a thing I don't like
A slang translation would be This is horse shit!
On the post: Small Idaho ISP 'Punishes' Twitter And Facebook's 'Censorship' ... By Blocking Access To Them Entirely
So hypothetically speaking...
If this small Idaho ISP was in fact a small California ISP, would it be in violation of the California Net Neutrality Gold-Standard law?
On the post: Small Idaho ISP 'Punishes' Twitter And Facebook's 'Censorship' ... By Blocking Access To Them Entirely
Mental health facilities
Here in the states, there are mental hospitals attached to penal complexes, but we otherwise don't have special hospitals for people insane enough to commit crimes. Inpatients are given padded rooms only if they're a threat to themselves. And are sedated when the nurses find them too annoying. Jeffrey Dahmer types are super rare.
For those of us crazies on the outside, on the rare occasion that someone is insane and wants to commit a crime, we have crisis councilors to talk them through the moment until they realize their plan is probably not such a good idea.
It's like Suicide Prevention, except it's also for I am going to stab my abusive boyfriend. or I am so filled with rage I am going to start a very large fire. Also Suicide Prevention volunteers aren't trained for that stuff, or really, I've discovered, for people who are serious about killing themselves.
I seriously doubt Whitehat above is self-aware enough to get assessed, let alone diagnosed and treated. It means that when he does commit a crime on account of his... interpretation of reality, he will not be afforded the benefit of doubt that comes with diminished capacity and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
It's a shame because he screams his indoctrination and radicalization, and probably should seek help before he goes and shoots up a church.
(Dan White and the reprisal from the Twinkie Defense made insanity pleas nearly useless throughout the US, even for those of us who have diagnoses.)
On the post: As Predicted: Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like
"like a bunch of whiny cunts"
Well, we can work out why you might have been banned off Twitter.
On the post: As Predicted: Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like
The same thing
You'll have to show evidence for Twitter banning people just for posting pro-trump enthusiasm.
I doubt that's why they got banned.
On the post: As Predicted: Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like
Re: Re: "How the hell was this a coup?"
anyone who challenges the vote of an election (which is absolutely allowed by the constitution) [would be a coup d'etat]
The Constitution doesn't allow for military or violent challenges to the election. Litigation, yes. Strong-arm assault, no. The Wednesday assault was violent. New revelations are showing it was significantly violent. Discussions on Parler have revealed that there were directions to use force. Materials brought by the raiding crowd indicate an intent to use deadly force.
Not just the pipe bombs.
Complain here all you like, but judges and juries will decide if the attack should be described as a coup d'etat, and what an appropriate punishment should be.
It's a good thing there are tons of photos and video footage.
On the post: As Predicted: Parler Is Banning Users It Doesn't Like
Sarcasm
Smacks to me of angry drunk posting.
Friends don't let friends...
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Regional blocking
Regional blocking is usually due to state laws and policies and it's based on where you are.
And yes it gets legally-gray if your region's internet needs are only served by Comcast, and Comcast decides you can't use a given website (and blocks it). But we're not supposed to have regional monopolies in the US. That's also the point of net neutrality (which Trump's guy Ajit Pai was glad to nix).
Of course these are about receiving content, not about posting or publishing content.
Law Enforcement is limited when it comes to restricting what you can say, but no website is required to host what you say.
On the post: Wednesday, January 6th: The Day The Game Of Politics Turned Into Insurrection
Failed terrorism
Yes, a lot of evidence has emerged since I wrote my first objection to the word, above.
I still don't like the word, as we really like to use Terrorist to mean anyone the administration doesn't like (for instance applied to asylum seekers approaching the Mexican-American border, and protestors in Portland).
But I will concur in this case there were evident terrorists within the crowd that stormed the US Capitol on January 6th.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Taxpayers already paid for the internet
For the internet, maybe, but not for the Twitter service on the web.
You could suggest that a state or federal government make a public Twitter service that goes by a maximum-free-speech policy. But when it comes to social programs, I'd prioritize universal healthcare and food access.
On the post: Not Easy, Not Unreasonable, Not Censorship: The Decision To Ban Trump From Twitter
Via Getty meets Florida Man
When I discovered there's a Chinese food restaurant named Translation Server Error I decided that place needs to be a favorite noodle spot in my Cyberpunk fictional world.
Next >>