Any reform will make the Internet a worse place, and if the right get their way, a hare filled place by forcing the publication of 'political discussion'.
A number of people on the left are also beginning to see section 230 as a threat to free speech, and are starting to back reforms. Their approach as to what they would like to see changed is different, but the goal of both sides is beginning to merge: don't allow corporate monopolies to be the determiners of what speech is and is not permissible.
This... makes no sense. If Congress actually wants to reform or repeal Section 230 (as stupid and counterproductive as that would be), then why do they need this? If they don't... then why do they need this ticking time bomb? It literally makes no sense at all.
It seems that congress only acts nowadays if it is up against some kind of deadline. Otherwise, rest assured, nothing will happen. Congress may want to reform section 230, but it lacks the motivation to take a vote that makes a final decision as to what exactly will be reformed. By breaking it up into smaller steps, this makes progress toward reform that can perhaps be agreed upon. It's a clever concept to get the ball rolling.
HBO Max costs $15 per month, so if you want to watch a movie, sign up for one month for the movie that you want to see, then cancel. Between the price of a ticket, plus concessions, its easily $15 right there where I live. Except now you get the whole rest of the month of HBO Max. Add in family members or friends to save even more on average. It seems like a lot of value.
And this is the point that in a functioning Congress, everyone would stand up to the President and say "no, this is not how this works." Congressional Republicans need to stop enabling this...
You forgot that a number of Democrats want to repeal section 230 also. The behavior of big tech companies and their censorship has been so ugly that they don't have as many allies in congress as you might imagine. For the past many years Trump has been called a populist, and rightfully so, because he has championed popular ideas. If Trump is as wrong on this subject as you say he is, Democrats wouldn't be running scared of him right now. Instead, it turns out that he's still pretty darn popular.
Yesterday, mathematician Bobby Piton was suspended from twitter just for attending a hearing in Arizona regarding voter fraud. Clearly, social media is not enforcing any if its "rules", but is engaging in punishment for people with which they disagree. Contrary to the testimony Dorsey and other tech CEOs gave in front of Congress. Repealing section 230 is likely the only way to end the abuse. Hopefully, this will happen.
EverQuest is releasing their 27th expansion soon. This business model isn't new.
The business model of releasing more content certainly isn't new. I think the idea of applying this model to non-subscription games is the trend to maintain longevity in a game. It's even being applied to the street fighting game genre now. Killer Instinct 3 essentially did it, by coming out with multiple DLC seasons constantly add in new characters, content, and balance changes. And that concept has now carried over into other games in the genre as well.
Other genres will no doubt be challenged to follow this model as well, if they want to become a profitable game that holds players' interest and withstands the test of time.
I've always been a fan of not making monetary awards not come out of a general pool of tax dollars, and instead see the payout come from the paycheck/s of the city employee/s that did the violating.
The main reason I think is that if it's generally known by the public that tracing thru your cellphone is easy and done all the time, then crooks will stop carrying cell phones, thereby making the technique much less useful. Just pull the battery, or perhaps leave it on and at home to claim an alibi.
A contract is going to describe an exchange. If the company that originally held the rights is no longer paying the royalties, then the contract has been broken, and Disney no longer has the publishing rights. Disney needs to pick one or the other, either paying royalties to keep the publishing contract alive, or stop publishing.
I say the internet is going to fracture someday. Some countries insist that their laws at least have supremacy on their soil. And because many nations cannot agree upon what speech is permitted, and what is not, the only solution is to splinter.
The announcements looked like great public relations back then. All for the low-low price of a 60 day grace period. But now the telecom industry needs the money.
We've seen some cities where residents don't pay for some utilities like water or gas for several months. Then the resident moves out and doesn't pay a thing, and the utility has to charge everyone else more (think: Flint Michigan water crisis origin). ISPs risk the same thing, except that they are a for-profit enterprise, not a municipal utility. They can't automatically dip into the city tax revenue and bail themselves out.
Can we really expect a private business to provide freebies indefinitely?
I'm curious how it was a huge problem when it was happening by Facebook, but somehow fine when it's all directly on the Mercer's own social network?
So far, I'm unaware of Parler selling out user data to third parties in violation of a consent decree. Perhaps that could happen, someday. But for now, Parler has a superior privacy record to Facebook. Until then, no data release means no problem.
I am having difficulty parsing the following, perhaps you could rephrase. Capitalism is socialism?
Primarily, you are missing the distinction that CRONY-capitalism is socialism.
Crony-capitalism is the concept whereby politically connected business will pass laws that determine which businesses will succeed, or even be permitted. Socialism is the flip-side of the coin, whereby politicians determine how businesses shall operate (this being the "social ownership" portion of the socialist equation), which in turn decides which businesses will be permitted to operate. The politician will do the whim of the lobbyist, and the lobbyist will money the politician, and together they become indistinguishable.
Socialism is the unholy alliance between corporations and government, and the crony-capitalism that occurs under incumbent monopoly law is socialism at its finest.
They should have just put down the date that it was established by the Homeland Security Act back in November of 2003. That would make it 17 years old today, and beyond controversy. No other date would make sense for the agency.
There's a saying along the lines of "police aren't bodyguards; they're just there to draw the chalk outline afterwards".
Fortunately, I'm able to exercise my 2nd amendment rights, and you should too. The police probably won't be nearby to defend you when you really need it. Don't rely on the police to defend you from a psychopath. Use your rights and ensure that this sort of thing cannot happen to you or your family.
It isn't ineffectual necessarily. First. the WHO has started to rightfully lose credibility. Second, if enough people abandon a non-credible organization, then it opens the possibility for a different organization to take its place.
If an individual attempts to bootleg an old copy on the open market, and is charged, would Warner/Activision/Fox then have to prove that they own the copyright if the individual claims that noone owns the copyright as a defense?
There are legitimate uses for the sale of this data. The North Carolina DMV did permissibly sell the data to Lexis Nexis. However, then Lexis Nexis (the data broker in this case) impermissibly resold the data to some lawyers so that the lawyers could market to people involved in vehicle crashes. That use of the data was not allowed under the federal Divers Privacy Protection Act.
Selling data is not automatically illegal. The impermissible use of the data is.
Mentioning 5G is just something for a commercial advertisement. Otherwise, they might have to compete on something else like price. It's better for the telecoms to hype themselves up on something for which they can charge more, and then deliver on a nebulous timetable.
On the post: Lindsey Graham's Latest Attack On Section 230: Reform It By 2023, Or We Take It Away
Re: Re: Deadline
A number of people on the left are also beginning to see section 230 as a threat to free speech, and are starting to back reforms. Their approach as to what they would like to see changed is different, but the goal of both sides is beginning to merge: don't allow corporate monopolies to be the determiners of what speech is and is not permissible.
On the post: Lindsey Graham's Latest Attack On Section 230: Reform It By 2023, Or We Take It Away
Deadline
It seems that congress only acts nowadays if it is up against some kind of deadline. Otherwise, rest assured, nothing will happen. Congress may want to reform section 230, but it lacks the motivation to take a vote that makes a final decision as to what exactly will be reformed. By breaking it up into smaller steps, this makes progress toward reform that can perhaps be agreed upon. It's a clever concept to get the ball rolling.
On the post: AT&T, HBO Put Another Bullet In Antiquated Theatrical Release Windows
Re: Nice freebees
HBO Max costs $15 per month, so if you want to watch a movie, sign up for one month for the movie that you want to see, then cancel. Between the price of a ticket, plus concessions, its easily $15 right there where I live. Except now you get the whole rest of the month of HBO Max. Add in family members or friends to save even more on average. It seems like a lot of value.
On the post: Trump Promises To Defund The Entire Military, If Congress Won't Let Him Punish The Internet For Being Mean To Him
He's Still Fighting
You forgot that a number of Democrats want to repeal section 230 also. The behavior of big tech companies and their censorship has been so ugly that they don't have as many allies in congress as you might imagine. For the past many years Trump has been called a populist, and rightfully so, because he has championed popular ideas. If Trump is as wrong on this subject as you say he is, Democrats wouldn't be running scared of him right now. Instead, it turns out that he's still pretty darn popular.
On the post: White House Still Pushing To Slip Section 230 Repeal Into 'Must Pass' Military Spending Bill
He's Still Fighting
Yesterday, mathematician Bobby Piton was suspended from twitter just for attending a hearing in Arizona regarding voter fraud. Clearly, social media is not enforcing any if its "rules", but is engaging in punishment for people with which they disagree. Contrary to the testimony Dorsey and other tech CEOs gave in front of Congress. Repealing section 230 is likely the only way to end the abuse. Hopefully, this will happen.
On the post: GTA5: A Living World Eyeing A Decade Of Rabid Play Instead Of Just A 'Game'
Re:
The business model of releasing more content certainly isn't new. I think the idea of applying this model to non-subscription games is the trend to maintain longevity in a game. It's even being applied to the street fighting game genre now. Killer Instinct 3 essentially did it, by coming out with multiple DLC seasons constantly add in new characters, content, and balance changes. And that concept has now carried over into other games in the genre as well.
Other genres will no doubt be challenged to follow this model as well, if they want to become a profitable game that holds players' interest and withstands the test of time.
On the post: Portland, Maine Passes Facial Recognition Ban That Says The City Can Fire Employees For Violating It
Re: That's how you do it
I've always been a fan of not making monetary awards not come out of a general pool of tax dollars, and instead see the payout come from the paycheck/s of the city employee/s that did the violating.
On the post: 'You Have Zero Privacy' Say RCMP Social Media Surveillance Documents Before Going On To Demonstrate Why
Re:
The main reason I think is that if it's generally known by the public that tracing thru your cellphone is easy and done all the time, then crooks will stop carrying cell phones, thereby making the technique much less useful. Just pull the battery, or perhaps leave it on and at home to claim an alibi.
On the post: Disney (Disney!) Accused Of Trying To Lawyer Its Way Out Of Paying Royalties To Alan Dean Foster
One or the other
A contract is going to describe an exchange. If the company that originally held the rights is no longer paying the royalties, then the contract has been broken, and Disney no longer has the publishing rights. Disney needs to pick one or the other, either paying royalties to keep the publishing contract alive, or stop publishing.
On the post: EU Court Backs Austrian Court, Says Local Libel Law Applies Everywhere In The World
Fiefdom Indeed
I say the internet is going to fracture someday. Some countries insist that their laws at least have supremacy on their soil. And because many nations cannot agree upon what speech is permitted, and what is not, the only solution is to splinter.
On the post: Cities Say ISPs Are Being Cagey About Low-Income Broadband Availability During Covid
PR
The announcements looked like great public relations back then. All for the low-low price of a 60 day grace period. But now the telecom industry needs the money.
We've seen some cities where residents don't pay for some utilities like water or gas for several months. Then the resident moves out and doesn't pay a thing, and the utility has to charge everyone else more (think: Flint Michigan water crisis origin). ISPs risk the same thing, except that they are a for-profit enterprise, not a municipal utility. They can't automatically dip into the city tax revenue and bail themselves out.
Can we really expect a private business to provide freebies indefinitely?
On the post: What If Cambridge Analytica Owned Its Own Social Network? CA Backer Rebekah Mercer Admits She's A Co-Founder Of Parler
First Things First
So far, I'm unaware of Parler selling out user data to third parties in violation of a consent decree. Perhaps that could happen, someday. But for now, Parler has a superior privacy record to Facebook. Until then, no data release means no problem.
On the post: Colorado Voters Continue To Peck Away At State Law Restricting Community Broadband
Re: Re: Re:
Primarily, you are missing the distinction that CRONY-capitalism is socialism.
Crony-capitalism is the concept whereby politically connected business will pass laws that determine which businesses will succeed, or even be permitted. Socialism is the flip-side of the coin, whereby politicians determine how businesses shall operate (this being the "social ownership" portion of the socialist equation), which in turn decides which businesses will be permitted to operate. The politician will do the whim of the lobbyist, and the lobbyist will money the politician, and together they become indistinguishable.
On the post: Colorado Voters Continue To Peck Away At State Law Restricting Community Broadband
Re:
Socialism is the unholy alliance between corporations and government, and the crony-capitalism that occurs under incumbent monopoly law is socialism at its finest.
On the post: ICE Briefly Becomes A Stranded Minor: Loses Its Twitter Account For Being Too Young
Legislation
They should have just put down the date that it was established by the Homeland Security Act back in November of 2003. That would make it 17 years old today, and beyond controversy. No other date would make sense for the agency.
On the post: Appeals Court Strips Immunity From Detectives Who Turned A Rape Report Into 18 Hours Of Terror For The Victim
Protect Yourself
There's a saying along the lines of "police aren't bodyguards; they're just there to draw the chalk outline afterwards".
Fortunately, I'm able to exercise my 2nd amendment rights, and you should too. The police probably won't be nearby to defend you when you really need it. Don't rely on the police to defend you from a psychopath. Use your rights and ensure that this sort of thing cannot happen to you or your family.
On the post: WHO Is Blocking Commenters From Even Mentioning Taiwan On Its Facebook Page
Re: Re:
It isn't ineffectual necessarily. First. the WHO has started to rightfully lose credibility. Second, if enough people abandon a non-credible organization, then it opens the possibility for a different organization to take its place.
On the post: Happy 20th Birthday To 'No One Lives Forever', The Classic PC Game That Can't Be Sold Today Thanks To IP
Bait
If an individual attempts to bootleg an old copy on the open market, and is charged, would Warner/Activision/Fox then have to prove that they own the copyright if the individual claims that noone owns the copyright as a defense?
On the post: Data Broker On The Hook For $5 Million After Abusing Its Access To North Carolina DMV Data
Re: As mentioned.
There are legitimate uses for the sale of this data. The North Carolina DMV did permissibly sell the data to Lexis Nexis. However, then Lexis Nexis (the data broker in this case) impermissibly resold the data to some lawyers so that the lawyers could market to people involved in vehicle crashes. That use of the data was not allowed under the federal Divers Privacy Protection Act.
Selling data is not automatically illegal. The impermissible use of the data is.
On the post: There Is No 'Race To 5G.' And The U.S. Wouldn't Be Winning Even If There Was
Differentiate
Mentioning 5G is just something for a commercial advertisement. Otherwise, they might have to compete on something else like price. It's better for the telecoms to hype themselves up on something for which they can charge more, and then deliver on a nebulous timetable.
Next >>