After all; if Project Veritas could actually dig up actual evidence for Project Veritas narratives, they wouldn't have to keep faking/doctoring evidence to make their case - and if they were "good at it", they wouldn't keep getting caught doing it.
They're currently occupied on forums discussing Huawei equipment being banned in US infrastructure, and some spillover (distraction?) to the "hostage diplomacy" China employed over a Huawei executive being extradited over banking infractions..
Or maybe he was an environmentalist, and trying to restore a environmentally appropriate, natural ecosystem instead of an artificial, monoculture "lawn" -- and the HOA opposed that?
Has anyone claimed (I haven't seen any such claim) that any police (or anyone else, for that matter) were fired on by the man in the house.
The reports are all "shots were fired" "inside the house", but specific claims that anyone (aside from the deceased, himself) were fired upon are notably conspicuous by their complete absence.
... of all the times people get hung up on whether the USA is a democracy or a republic, or whether frogs will placidly allow themselves to be boiled alive, if only the temperature is raised gradually enough.
I'd suggest that most people, when using the expression that "one can't shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre", are not actually talking about American case law or the minutia of American legal history, but appealing to an argument that malicious or reckless speech can be dangerous and might merit legal consequences -- and the actual, specific, historical origin of the expression is generally irrelevant to the point being made.
I think that perhaps this is why the expression keeps cropping up, and why the inevitable "corrections" keep getting ignored and forgotten yet again -- the correction may be absolutely "true", but it's usually also quite beside the point.
I just spent half my afternoon trying to pin down just how toxic (to humans) borax and boric acid are (or aren't), and just why people might think think they are (or aren't).
I also learned that in the EU, borax has been virtually eliminated (banned) as a consumer product or component thereof -- and replaced with something distinctly more dubious.
On an interesting detour in this meander, I also learned that the red food colour certified in the USA appears to be considered unsafe in the EU, while the red food colouring approved in the EU is actually banned in the USA...
And proponents of both stances appear to be quite certain that they have authoritative backing for their positions.
Suddenly I'm feeling slightly more charitable towards some of those people who are "unsure" about covid vaccines or climate change.
Well, you know...
the Good Cop will be a lot harder to replace than the Bad Cop.
It's not that there aren't any good cops, it's that they're in a system where they have to manage as best they can, wherever they have any say in how things go down, quit (or be driven out) when that just gets too damn hard, or go bad themselves.
Let's leave the unhelpfully simplistic, black and white characterizations to the bad cops -- and they've got that down, already.
Trade Secrets aren't like Patents.
Their protection lies in the fact that they are secret, but competitors (and others) are generally allowed to figure out other companies.
IANAL, but isn't it equally and legally legitimate for Taylor and for Kytch to examine each others' devices to learn their "secrets"?
Why would anyone presume that any random moderator would be equally well qualified to, or expected to, moderate every random topic, in a massive forum?
In a reasonable system, moderators would presumably have their own areas of actual expertise, and/or a broader area of general competence. Then there would be items any moderator could handle. And finally, there would be those subjects where some other , better qualified moderator would get tasked with the job.
This technology is a policy, and as subject to changes and gaming as any other policy -- it's just that this policy in now implemented on the "user's" (we used to call him/her the "owner") own phone.
"But it was only by performing an unwarranted background search that we were in fact able to determine that that little old lady wasn't a likely security threat or a criminal."
On the post: Yes, Even If You Think Project Veritas Are A Bunch Of Malicious Grifters, FBI Raid Is Concerning
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
After all; if Project Veritas could actually dig up actual evidence for Project Veritas narratives, they wouldn't have to keep faking/doctoring evidence to make their case - and if they were "good at it", they wouldn't keep getting caught doing it.
On the post: Chinese Internet Companies Are Censoring People Who Write Or Speak Tibetan Or Uyghur, Lending A Hand To China's Cultural Genocides
Re: Propaganda
They're currently occupied on forums discussing Huawei equipment being banned in US infrastructure, and some spillover (distraction?) to the "hostage diplomacy" China employed over a Huawei executive being extradited over banking infractions..
On the post: Austin Homeowners Association Pitches In To Help Cops Kill A Guy Over Uncut Grass
Re: Re: Re: 12 inches !
Or maybe he was an environmentalist, and trying to restore a environmentally appropriate, natural ecosystem instead of an artificial, monoculture "lawn" -- and the HOA opposed that?
On the post: Austin Homeowners Association Pitches In To Help Cops Kill A Guy Over Uncut Grass
Re: Re: Re:
Fact check question:
Has anyone claimed (I haven't seen any such claim) that any police (or anyone else, for that matter) were fired on by the man in the house.
The reports are all "shots were fired" "inside the house", but specific claims that anyone (aside from the deceased, himself) were fired upon are notably conspicuous by their complete absence.
On the post: Hawaii School, Police Department On The Verge Of Being Sued For Arresting A Ten-Year-Old Girl Over A Drawing
Re: Cut their salaried
Judgment. Discretion. "Difficult". "Concerned"...
They keep using those words; I don't think any of those words mean what they seem to think they mean.
On the post: Why Falsely Claiming It's Illegal To Shout Fire In A Crowded Theater Distorts Any Conversation About Online Speech
This argument tends to remind me
... of all the times people get hung up on whether the USA is a democracy or a republic, or whether frogs will placidly allow themselves to be boiled alive, if only the temperature is raised gradually enough.
I'd suggest that most people, when using the expression that "one can't shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theatre", are not actually talking about American case law or the minutia of American legal history, but appealing to an argument that malicious or reckless speech can be dangerous and might merit legal consequences -- and the actual, specific, historical origin of the expression is generally irrelevant to the point being made.
I think that perhaps this is why the expression keeps cropping up, and why the inevitable "corrections" keep getting ignored and forgotten yet again -- the correction may be absolutely "true", but it's usually also quite beside the point.
On the post: Top Publishers Aim To Own The Entire Academic Research Publishing Stack; Here's How To Stop That Happening
Re: Can't get into prior piece! But here 'tis.
Is it my imagination, or has this doofus gotten even more incoherent over time?
On the post: Misquoting Einstein Is Fast And Stupid, But Not Accurate
Re: Cite me, please
Yeah, I know.
I just spent half my afternoon trying to pin down just how toxic (to humans) borax and boric acid are (or aren't), and just why people might think think they are (or aren't).
I also learned that in the EU, borax has been virtually eliminated (banned) as a consumer product or component thereof -- and replaced with something distinctly more dubious.
On an interesting detour in this meander, I also learned that the red food colour certified in the USA appears to be considered unsafe in the EU, while the red food colouring approved in the EU is actually banned in the USA...
And proponents of both stances appear to be quite certain that they have authoritative backing for their positions.
Suddenly I'm feeling slightly more charitable towards some of those people who are "unsure" about covid vaccines or climate change.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Wasn't it self evident that someone calling themselves 'John Loki' was a full-out troll, with malice aforethought?
(That, plus the fact that his choice of pen-name was the only intelligent thing in his entire commentary.)
On the post: Cop Who Killed A Suicidal Man Less Than 11 Seconds After Entering His House Convicted Of Murder
Well, you know...
the Good Cop will be a lot harder to replace than the Bad Cop.
It's not that there aren't any good cops, it's that they're in a system where they have to manage as best they can, wherever they have any say in how things go down, quit (or be driven out) when that just gets too damn hard, or go bad themselves.
Let's leave the unhelpfully simplistic, black and white characterizations to the bad cops -- and they've got that down, already.
On the post: Police Department Caught Falsifying Evidence Logs Used In Trial Of PD Employee Who Was Caught Falsifying Evidence Logs
Re: Tree/Fruit?
... especially when it's the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree.
On the post: FTC Decides Maybe It's Time To Start Asking Why McDonalds Ice Cream Machines Are Broken All The Damn Time
Does that legal judgment even make sense?
Trade Secrets aren't like Patents.
Their protection lies in the fact that they are secret, but competitors (and others) are generally allowed to figure out other companies.
IANAL, but isn't it equally and legally legitimate for Taylor and for Kytch to examine each others' devices to learn their "secrets"?
On the post: FTC Decides Maybe It's Time To Start Asking Why McDonalds Ice Cream Machines Are Broken All The Damn Time
Does that legal judgment even make sense?
On the post: Lessons Learned From Creating Good Faith Debate In A Sea Of Garbage Disinformation
Re: Re:
Why would anyone presume that any random moderator would be equally well qualified to, or expected to, moderate every random topic, in a massive forum?
In a reasonable system, moderators would presumably have their own areas of actual expertise, and/or a broader area of general competence. Then there would be items any moderator could handle. And finally, there would be those subjects where some other , better qualified moderator would get tasked with the job.
On the post: GOP Hollowly Threatens To 'Shut Down' Telecom Companies For Cooperating With Legal January 6 Inquiries
Re: Re: Re: that "ax" must be miniscule
There isn't.
But why would you expect him to notice?
On the post: Researchers Who Built Similar System Explain Why Apple's CSAM Scanning System Is Dangerous
Re:
This technology is a policy, and as subject to changes and gaming as any other policy -- it's just that this policy in now implemented on the "user's" (we used to call him/her the "owner") own phone.
On the post: OnlyPrudes: OnlyFans, The Platform For Sexually Explicit Content, Says No More Sexually Explicit Content (Except For Nudes)
Re: Re: Government Beneficiary
I had to do a search on MRA to figure out that that's "Mens Rights Activists" -- in this context, that made me nearly snort my coffee..
On the post: OnlyPrudes: OnlyFans, The Platform For Sexually Explicit Content, Says No More Sexually Explicit Content (Except For Nudes)
Re: Re: Government Beneficiary
Actual 'conservative' (ie. not racist, fascist, etc.) opinions, being actually 'censored'?
Ummm...
Sorry -- that's a null set.
On the post: Illinois Governor Signs Law Banning Cops From Performing Background Searches On Public Speakers
Re: My Two Cents
I can hear the excuses already...
"But it was only by performing an unwarranted background search that we were in fact able to determine that that little old lady wasn't a likely security threat or a criminal."
On the post: Biden Warns That The Next Kinetic War Will Be The Result Of A Cyberattack, Which Is Stupid
I wonder if the Ukrainians find the notion so far-fetched?
Next >>