One of the groups pushing bullshit and xenophobic TV and radio ads campaigning against patent waivers was a shady dark money disinformative propaganda group created as a tax dodge by a Trump staffer and now run by agents of Karl Rove and Mitch McConnell's former chief of staff.
Re: A right you can't afford may as well not exist
Couldn't find the source last time I checked (thought it was Goldman's paper, but didn't find it in there), but wasn't there somewhere that found the difference in cost for defending against censorious sham lawsuits is somewhere around 5 figures with 230, vs high 6-7 figures without it?
Gov. Abattoir claims this law bans the "censorship" of "Conservative Viewpoints."
From other coverage on the law:
During debate last week, Texas Democrats offered amendments that would explicitly allow social media platforms to take down posts related to Holocaust denial, domestic and international terrorism, and vaccine disinformation. Republicans succeeded in defeating all three."
So Texas's Republican politicians have given us documented evidence of exactly what Republicans believe their "Conservative viewpoints" are.
On the post: The LAPD Is Asking City Residents To Hand Over Social Media Account Info To Feed To Its Unsupervised Monitoring Software
Re: Why not?
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: Critics Of Patent Waivers Are Claiming They Were Right... Despite No Patent Waiver Actually Issuing Yet
Re: Re:
Source: Myself hearing the ads* on TV and radio, and looking up the background of the group that named itself as responsible: "One Nation America."
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Twitter Removes 'Verified' Badge In Response To Policy Violations (2017)
Re: Re:
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: Commentator Insists That Fact Checking Is An Attack On Free Speech
Re: Re: So in essence
We get it, you hate freedom of speech.
On the post: I Am Rupert Murdoch's Total Lack Of Shame: Now Demanding Intermediary Liability Protections For News Corp.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe They Should Change
That idea was so stupid and damaging that it got Congress to get off its ass and to fix it with 230.
On the post: Critics Of Patent Waivers Are Claiming They Were Right... Despite No Patent Waiver Actually Issuing Yet
One of the groups pushing bullshit and xenophobic TV and radio ads campaigning against patent waivers was a shady dark money disinformative propaganda group created as a tax dodge by a Trump staffer and now run by agents of Karl Rove and Mitch McConnell's former chief of staff.
On the post: Commentator Insists That Fact Checking Is An Attack On Free Speech
Re: Insisting
Because pretty much everyone here except for you understands and supports free speech.
On the post: Commentator Insists That Fact Checking Is An Attack On Free Speech
Re:
Liar.
On the post: Commentator Insists That Fact Checking Is An Attack On Free Speech
Re: Re:
[Projects facts not in evidence]
On the post: I Am Rupert Murdoch's Total Lack Of Shame: Now Demanding Intermediary Liability Protections For News Corp.
Re: Re: ad hoc innoc time
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: Florida Presents Its Laughable Appeal For Its Unconstitutional Social Media Content Moderation Law
Re: Re: Re: Something strange.
Stop lying.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3351323
https://www.techdirt.com/articles /20210905/16335447510/malwarebytes-conclusion-shows-section-230s-best-feature-killing-dumb-cases-bef ore-they-waste-everyones-time-money.shtml#comments
On the post: Malwarebytes Conclusion Shows Section 230's Best Feature: Killing Dumb Cases Before They Waste Everyone's Time And Money
Re: Re: Re: A right you can't afford may as well not exist
Yeah, that looks like what I was remembering, thanks. Now it should be easier to find as a bookmark.
On the post: Florida Presents Its Laughable Appeal For Its Unconstitutional Social Media Content Moderation Law
Re: un-nocuous first line
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: Malwarebytes Conclusion Shows Section 230's Best Feature: Killing Dumb Cases Before They Waste Everyone's Time And Money
Re: A right you can't afford may as well not exist
Couldn't find the source last time I checked (thought it was Goldman's paper, but didn't find it in there), but wasn't there somewhere that found the difference in cost for defending against censorious sham lawsuits is somewhere around 5 figures with 230, vs high 6-7 figures without it?
On the post: The Role Of Confirmation Bias In Spreading Misinformation
Re: Re: Re: Horse Dewormer wasn't a clue?
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: Cop Who Killed A Suicidal Man Less Than 11 Seconds After Entering His House Convicted Of Murder
Re: A Pail of Cold Water
[Hallucinates facts not in evidence]
On the post: Connecticut Court Orders Blogger To Turn Over Electronic Devices To Cop Suing Over Alleged Defamation By Blog's Commenters
Re:
ftfy
On the post: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Announces On Twitter The Livestreaming On Facebook Of His Signing Of A Bill That Removes 1st Amendment Rights For Both
Gov. Abattoir claims this law bans the "censorship" of "Conservative Viewpoints."
From other coverage on the law:
So Texas's Republican politicians have given us documented evidence of exactly what Republicans believe their "Conservative viewpoints" are.
On the post: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Announces On Twitter The Livestreaming On Facebook Of His Signing Of A Bill That Removes 1st Amendment Rights For Both
[Hallucinates facts not in ecidence]
On the post: The Role Of Confirmation Bias In Spreading Misinformation
Re: Re: How many corrections does your news source issue per mon
Also note that Techdirt proves that being sued is not an indicator of being unreliable.
Next >>