It’s times like these that all Americans must do some soul searching. Diversity is hard, but as a recent article in the WSJ pointed out, it’s worth the effort. Diversity of opinion is perhaps even more difficult.
Few in the media will note that the ACLU went to court to defend the neo-Nazi’s right to protest in Charlottesville. Even though the opinions expressed are repugnant to any rational human, these groups have the right to peacefully demonstrate. Unfortunately, there are violent groups in America who champion, not free speech, but ‘right’ speech and believe that any opinion they don’t agree with must be violently opposed.
The Orwellian name for one of these groups is the Antifa or anti-fascist. These and other movements appear to have the support of many in the media, some politicians, and even some in the clergy.
As Americans, we must stand against violent extremist groups on the left as well as those on the right. Those who seek to shutdown opposing opinions through violence must ALSO be denounced as anti-American hate groups.
The path of intolerance, as demonstrated by these groups, will lead us to another civil war.
Can anyone make the case that if Antifa hadn't shown up or if the police had actually done their job and separated the demonstrators from the illegally assembled counter protesters, that violence would have still occurred. The death was tragic but it was entirely avoidable - I blame the city and the cops.
I often disagree with the points Techdirt raises, especially when Mike claims that Techdirt doesn't lean one way or the other on the ideological spectrum (it leans left). I realized a long time ago that I'll probably not change anyone's mind with my posts. Some of y'all drank the kool aid a long time ago. And I get my share of flames for speaking out for what I think is right. But, to my knowledge, none of my comments have been suppressed. I've even flagged a few comments myself (those calling for violence) - those comments never got hidden either.
But the articles do make me think about what's going on in our society and that's a good thing. I appreciate the fact that sometimes when I post I get a reasoned response from folks that I could probably agree to disagree with. Our socioeconomic positions may be so far apart that we can't see the world the same way - but I'm still interested in what you have to say.
All that being said - I donated to Techdirt's legal defense fund. Did you?
Not sure about the merger, but Charter delivers...
I get it that the merger may result in decreased competition and all that, but I gotta say that Charter has delivered excellent service. I've had other ISPs and Charter has gone above and beyond on every occasion. With AT&T I paid for 18Mbs and only got 11Mbs if I was lucky. With Charter, I paid for 20Mbs and got 30Mbs most of the time. When they came out with Spectrum, they upgraded me to 100Mbs at no additional charge. I usually get 130Mbs on Speedtest.
I know, no one on this board likes to hear anything good about cable companies and I'm sure many will consider me a paid shill for the cable companies, but I gotta be fair and give praise where praise is due.
Just more over reaction by the liberal left to anything Trump. It's not like these companies are actually harmed by the travel ban. Just how many Somali software developers are being banned from entering the country? I realize they work cheap on their H1B visas, but there can't be many of them.
Please donate to the Techdirt survival fund. I did.
The rule, which as you point out hadn't even taken effect yet, is just one example of the massive bureaucratic over reach that was the Obama administration. Instead of making laws, they made rules and executive orders which are much easier to nullify. We need to reel in the power of the deep state and get back to making laws that have some teeth and will stick. Of course, in order to do that the laws need mainstream support beyond some left wing, nanny state, big government types. I look forward to more reversals of Obama era overreach and the return of government for the people by the people.
Yes, the story is about REPUBLICANS freaking out. I guess from a certain point of view - that's unusual enough to make an interesting story. DEMOCRATS freak out all time, so no story there I guess.
Mike, can't you get your friends at Google to fix this one? You have to dig quite a bit to find the real (true) store. If you setup a legal defense fund, I'll donate.
Found the answer to my question on kim komando's site:
Frantic Locker was first reported to spread via spam text messages and malicious web links. To avoid getting your Google TV infected, be careful when visiting websites using the built-in TV web browser. Additionally, checking email and clicking unknown links through your TV can also put it at risk. However, in Cauthon's case, it appears that his TV was infected by a rogue app. It goes without saying, please refrain from downloading and installing apps from unofficial and unknown app sources.
Don't install 3rd party apps, don't browse the web, don't check your email on your 'smart' TV. In short - don't do stupid stuff.
The Smart features on my Sony (with Android TV) are pretty worthless. The ARC will not pass Dolby Digital+ (only Dolby Digital) so I bought a Roku. They could also do away with the worthless TV speakers as far as I'm concerned.
Anyone know how this guy got infected? What features did he use? Email? Browser? Google store?
The EFF defines the legal standard for defamation as: Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice
So the list the WaPo published presumably only included right leaning sites and it could be argued that the WaPo is not absent malice in opposing such sites whose views differ mightily from it's editorial board. The WaPo should have known the story was bogus as other newspapers did but it furthered their narrative so they went with it. Could it be considered defamation? Doesn't appear to be as open or shut a case as you intimate Mike.
I get most of my fake news from cable news channels.
I read the article through twice and couldn't find anything to disagree with. This represents a slippery slope to more overt censorship which is bad no matter which side of the political divide you reside on. Nice job Mike.
So Mike, Why didn't you include the original tweets? This guy is threatening folks. Of course, he was only threatening Trump voters and random white people. Not really that big a deal, right?
The issue is that the mass media has lost the trust of the American people. You can agonize about people not accepting the facts, but unless the facts come from a trusted source they won't be accepted. Fact checking is worthless unless there is some degree of trust the fact checkers, it's not that complicated.
A better column would be an analysis of why the mainstream media has lost the trust of the American people. (And no fair blaming it on stupid people, that's an elite cop out.)
I read WSJ, WaPo, NYT, Slate, Vox, Breitbart, Drudge, RCP, Politico, Fox, MSNBC, NPR, the Hill, and Townhall for political news. There are plenty of sites out there that cover politics. Very few sites cover technology, the surveillance state, etc. like Tech Dirt does. (IMHO, YMMV)
Tim - even though I agree with the premise of your piece, I'm wondering why it's on tech dirt. Is tech dirt just becoming just another political site? (albeit one that prides itself on not taking sides)
We've had this argument before when you tried to convince me that Vox was unbiased. I believe that only by knowing and acknowledging our own inherent biases can we break out of them and hope to glimpse the objective truth. I subscribe to and read conservative publications/sites and liberal publications/sites so I can see all sides of an issue. You're apparently convinced you're right, so no need to see the whole picture, no need to understand the viewpoints of the other side because in your mind there are no sides and there is only your side and you're right. Good luck with that. Consider me the loyal opposition. I'll keep reading because I like your opinions, they make me think, even if you can't admit you have an opinion.
First - you don't have a side? Sure, of course you would have been equally happy who ever won the election.
I'm not denying the Jews or Gays are fearful, I was saying that their fears have been stoked by media misrepresentations of Trump (who is not anti-gay or anti-Jew). It's the media's fault these folks are so upset.
I think tech dirt does a great job, or else I wouldn't even both to read it much less post. But it bothers me when you get too political. Thanks.
On the post: Defending Hateful Speech Is Unpleasant But Essential, Even When Violence Is The End Result
Few in the media will note that the ACLU went to court to defend the neo-Nazi’s right to protest in Charlottesville. Even though the opinions expressed are repugnant to any rational human, these groups have the right to peacefully demonstrate. Unfortunately, there are violent groups in America who champion, not free speech, but ‘right’ speech and believe that any opinion they don’t agree with must be violently opposed.
The Orwellian name for one of these groups is the Antifa or anti-fascist. These and other movements appear to have the support of many in the media, some politicians, and even some in the clergy.
As Americans, we must stand against violent extremist groups on the left as well as those on the right. Those who seek to shutdown opposing opinions through violence must ALSO be denounced as anti-American hate groups.
The path of intolerance, as demonstrated by these groups, will lead us to another civil war.
On the post: Defending Hateful Speech Is Unpleasant But Essential, Even When Violence Is The End Result
Re: Re:
On the post: Techdirt: Now With More Free Speech Reporting
Yes, but...
But the articles do make me think about what's going on in our society and that's a good thing. I appreciate the fact that sometimes when I post I get a reasoned response from folks that I could probably agree to disagree with. Our socioeconomic positions may be so far apart that we can't see the world the same way - but I'm still interested in what you have to say.
All that being said - I donated to Techdirt's legal defense fund. Did you?
On the post: Charter, Verizon Flirt With Merger, Because Who Likes Broadband Competition Anyway?
Not sure about the merger, but Charter delivers...
I know, no one on this board likes to hear anything good about cable companies and I'm sure many will consider me a paid shill for the cable companies, but I gotta be fair and give praise where praise is due.
On the post: 162 Tech Companies Tell Appeals Court That Trump's 2nd Travel Ban Is Illegal
Please donate to the Techdirt survival fund. I did.
On the post: No, You Can't Buy Congress's Internet Data, Or Anyone Else's
More please
On the post: The Biggest Advocates For An Imperial Executive Branch Are Suddenly Freaking Out Over Trump
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life
Google "Who invented email"
On the post: Man Has To Beg LG To Uncripple His 'Smart' TV After Ransomware Attack
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Found the answer to my question on kim komando's site:
Frantic Locker was first reported to spread via spam text messages and malicious web links. To avoid getting your Google TV infected, be careful when visiting websites using the built-in TV web browser. Additionally, checking email and clicking unknown links through your TV can also put it at risk. However, in Cauthon's case, it appears that his TV was infected by a rogue app. It goes without saying, please refrain from downloading and installing apps from unofficial and unknown app sources.
Don't install 3rd party apps, don't browse the web, don't check your email on your 'smart' TV. In short - don't do stupid stuff.
On the post: Man Has To Beg LG To Uncripple His 'Smart' TV After Ransomware Attack
Re: Re: Re:
Anyone know how this guy got infected? What features did he use? Email? Browser? Google store?
On the post: Man Has To Beg LG To Uncripple His 'Smart' TV After Ransomware Attack
Re: Re:
Maybe the security briefings were politically biased so as to delegitimize the rightful owner who won the TV fair and square.
On the post: Fake News About Fake News Leads To (Fake?) Defamation Threat
Generally, defamation is a false and unprivileged statement of fact that is harmful to someone's reputation, and published "with fault," meaning as a result of negligence or malice
So the list the WaPo published presumably only included right leaning sites and it could be argued that the WaPo is not absent malice in opposing such sites whose views differ mightily from it's editorial board. The WaPo should have known the story was bogus as other newspapers did but it furthered their narrative so they went with it. Could it be considered defamation? Doesn't appear to be as open or shut a case as you intimate Mike.
I get most of my fake news from cable news channels.
On the post: This Is A Really Bad Idea: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube & Microsoft Agree To Block 'Terrorist' Content
Nicely done
On the post: This Is A Really Bad Idea: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube & Microsoft Agree To Block 'Terrorist' Content
Re: Re: Re: Well the silver lining is...
On the post: Rutgers Lecturer Forcibly Sent For Psych Evaluation By NYPD For Some Tweets About The Election
Re: Re:
On the post: Let Them Eat Facts: Why Fact Checking Is Mostly Useless In Convincing Voters
Fact checking isn't the issue
A better column would be an analysis of why the mainstream media has lost the trust of the American people. (And no fair blaming it on stupid people, that's an elite cop out.)
On the post: Hillary Clinton Looks At Her Campaign's Many Missteps, Decides To Blame James Comey For Her Loss
Re: Re: Why?
I read WSJ, WaPo, NYT, Slate, Vox, Breitbart, Drudge, RCP, Politico, Fox, MSNBC, NPR, the Hill, and Townhall for political news. There are plenty of sites out there that cover politics. Very few sites cover technology, the surveillance state, etc. like Tech Dirt does. (IMHO, YMMV)
On the post: Hillary Clinton Looks At Her Campaign's Many Missteps, Decides To Blame James Comey For Her Loss
Why?
On the post: Trump's Very First Tweet As President Elect Basically Shits On The First Amendment
Re: Re: Re: Re: You need to get over it Mike...
On the post: Trump's Very First Tweet As President Elect Basically Shits On The First Amendment
Re: Re: You need to get over it Mike...
First - you don't have a side? Sure, of course you would have been equally happy who ever won the election.
I'm not denying the Jews or Gays are fearful, I was saying that their fears have been stoked by media misrepresentations of Trump (who is not anti-gay or anti-Jew). It's the media's fault these folks are so upset.
I think tech dirt does a great job, or else I wouldn't even both to read it much less post. But it bothers me when you get too political. Thanks.
Next >>