Case in point - a literate person wouldn't have used the inaccurate description of "dodged the question" to refer to me shooting down your pathetic attempt at deflection.
The more a source lies unabashedly, the more lostinlodos trusts it.
Which is also why he trusts Breitbart, that only rarely corrects any of its numerous deliberate lies, over something like the Washington Post, that always corrects its rare error.
When people are "censored" elsewhere for things like homophobia, transphobia, racism and spreading false information, those things seem to have become so central to their identities that they take it as a personal attack.
Bigots truly believe the worst thing you can do to them is call them what they are.
Huh. This must be an example of the “political differences” over which some people around here say Twitter and Facebook ban people. And yet, this isn’t a story about Twitter and Facebook. Odd. 🤔
That Anonymous Coward (profile), 25 Feb 2022 @ 11:23am
Imagine my shock that MeinSpace isn't working out they thought it would.
Now the various factions are claiming to be the true voice of MeinSpace, as they turn on each other in ways much worse than they ever experienced on those other liberal platforms who hate them because they are conservative (not because they were calling for the murder of Pence to giving 'Merkia back to its true leader).
At this point 'conservative 'free speech' platform ends up being just as bad if not worse than the platforms they condemn when it comes to moderation' is so regular and guaranteed you could ditch setting your time from an atomic clock and move to setting it to that instead.
Social media, from the very beginning, was about hosting content that you put up. It's not transient, it's perpetual. That, alone, makes a huge difference, especially with regards to the 1st Amendment's freedom of association.
This is the advancement of technology. Originally, an electric current traveled down a copper wire at nearly the speed of light. Then, a digital voice signal gets held resident on a semiconductor for a fraction of a second, prior to traveling on down the line. Now, we have data storage, where some unicode characters are stored on a hard drive until such time as the recipients want to retrieve it, perhaps minutes or hours later. The signal has always been on the network for some measurable length of time. The transmission time does not transform the signal into an association to which the network operator can object, because the message never creates an association at all.
Why does everything boil down to children no matter what the law is? There's only so many time that button can be pressed before it stops working. For many of us, it already has.
Social media platforms wouldn't be common carriers even if by some miracle one of the big telcos managed not to completely fall flat on their faces with their repeated comical attempts to buy out a big social media site. The platform itself isn't the network infrastructure. Access to it is carried on the infrastructure. Clear division. Even if for the sake of argument you happen to control both, then you're regulated as a common carrier specifically for your behaviour regarding one specific side of the business, not the other.
Well, I’d say it’s been a very long time since politicians, national anyway, used newspapers as official government distribution of information.
Billboard? When and where?
Official news broadcasts (TV/RADIO/.GOV web sites) are usually live at first. So that doesn’t really count.
My point being, wtf are they doing using non-government tools for government communication in the first place?
Which is exactly the point - a publicly traded company answers to the stockholders. If they act like they don't care about what the stockholders think, then how long do you suppose they'll be trading publicly? Tell us, if you held stock in a company that pulled this kind of stunt, would you keep your money there, or would you sell your stake and move on to something more likely to succeed without screaming, wailing and gnashing their teeth, all because they were short-sighted?
But more important is the fact that while trading is suspended, not only can one not sell his/her stock, but no one can buy it either. That can ham-string a company at a critical time. And don't think that stockholders, current or potential, won't pay attention to that kind of thing. It's in their nature to do so, less they loose their investment all the more foolishly.
Oh, wait... were you thinking in terms of the individual investor, the guy who puts in between 10,000 and 100,000 bucks? No, my friend, I'm talking about the institutional investors, the ones with more money to invest than the value of all small-cap and many medium-cap corporations. Those are the people who will pull up stakes as soon as trading resumes, and trust me, that kind of sell-off is not something from which a company can easily recover.
Somehow supporting secure borders and levelling international trade (and right to keep a firearm) became Trump worship? Despite those ideas predating trump by, human history?
as a centrist European I'd have to call BS on that
On various four point tests I strongly fall left libertarian
How far left or down depends on the questions asked. But always left libertarian.
The only place I fall into line with Republicans is the topic of defence.
And there only partially.
On the post: US Copyright Office Gets It Right (Again): AI-Generated Works Do Not Get A Copyright Monopoly
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Some
[lostin "Karl is against free speech! It's not a coup attempt!" lodos asserts facts contrary to evidence as always]
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wait…
Borders only need to be secured against brown people, dont'cha know?
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Case in point - a literate person wouldn't have used the inaccurate description of "dodged the question" to refer to me shooting down your pathetic attempt at deflection.
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wait…
The more a source lies unabashedly, the more lostinlodos trusts it.
Which is also why he trusts Breitbart, that only rarely corrects any of its numerous deliberate lies, over something like the Washington Post, that always corrects its rare error.
On the post: As Expected, Trump's Social Network Is Rapidly Banning Users It Doesn't Like, Without Telling Them Why
Bigots truly believe the worst thing you can do to them is call them what they are.
On the post: Censr: Alt-Right Twitter Alternative Gettr Bans Posts, Accounts Calling One Of Its Backers A Chinese Spy
Huh. This must be an example of the “political differences” over which some people around here say Twitter and Facebook ban people. And yet, this isn’t a story about Twitter and Facebook. Odd. 🤔
On the post: Censr: Alt-Right Twitter Alternative Gettr Bans Posts, Accounts Calling One Of Its Backers A Chinese Spy
Voting with your footnotes
Punctuation saves lives!
On the post: Censr: Alt-Right Twitter Alternative Gettr Bans Posts, Accounts Calling One Of Its Backers A Chinese Spy
Imagine my shock that MeinSpace isn't working out they thought it would.
Now the various factions are claiming to be the true voice of MeinSpace, as they turn on each other in ways much worse than they ever experienced on those other liberal platforms who hate them because they are conservative (not because they were calling for the murder of Pence to giving 'Merkia back to its true leader).
On the post: Censr: Alt-Right Twitter Alternative Gettr Bans Posts, Accounts Calling One Of Its Backers A Chinese Spy
Another day ending in 'Y' Is it?
At this point 'conservative 'free speech' platform ends up being just as bad if not worse than the platforms they condemn when it comes to moderation' is so regular and guaranteed you could ditch setting your time from an atomic clock and move to setting it to that instead.
On the post: Why It Makes No Sense To Call Websites 'Common Carriers'
Loitering Signal Association
This is the advancement of technology. Originally, an electric current traveled down a copper wire at nearly the speed of light. Then, a digital voice signal gets held resident on a semiconductor for a fraction of a second, prior to traveling on down the line. Now, we have data storage, where some unicode characters are stored on a hard drive until such time as the recipients want to retrieve it, perhaps minutes or hours later. The signal has always been on the network for some measurable length of time. The transmission time does not transform the signal into an association to which the network operator can object, because the message never creates an association at all.
On the post: 'Peaky Blinders' Production Company Working With Bushmills On A Themed Whiskey
Not sure if Mandabach is intentionally or unintentionally trying to provoke the Streisand effect...
On the post: New Right To Repair Bill Targets Obnoxious Auto Industry Behavior
For/Against Children
Why does everything boil down to children no matter what the law is? There's only so many time that button can be pressed before it stops working. For many of us, it already has.
On the post: Why It Makes No Sense To Call Websites 'Common Carriers'
Social media platforms wouldn't be common carriers even if by some miracle one of the big telcos managed not to completely fall flat on their faces with their repeated comical attempts to buy out a big social media site. The platform itself isn't the network infrastructure. Access to it is carried on the infrastructure. Clear division. Even if for the sake of argument you happen to control both, then you're regulated as a common carrier specifically for your behaviour regarding one specific side of the business, not the other.
On the post: How Our Convoluted Copyright Regime Explains Why Spotify Chose Joe Rogan Over Neil Young
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, I’d say it’s been a very long time since politicians, national anyway, used newspapers as official government distribution of information.
Billboard? When and where?
Official news broadcasts (TV/RADIO/.GOV web sites) are usually live at first. So that doesn’t really count.
My point being, wtf are they doing using non-government tools for government communication in the first place?
On the post: Why It Makes No Sense To Call Websites 'Common Carriers'
Why stop there?
At this point why not just outlaw electronic communication.
On the post: Medical, Home Alarm Industries Warn Of Major Outages As AT&T Shuts Down 3G Network
Re: Re: Re:
Which is exactly the point - a publicly traded company answers to the stockholders. If they act like they don't care about what the stockholders think, then how long do you suppose they'll be trading publicly? Tell us, if you held stock in a company that pulled this kind of stunt, would you keep your money there, or would you sell your stake and move on to something more likely to succeed without screaming, wailing and gnashing their teeth, all because they were short-sighted?
But more important is the fact that while trading is suspended, not only can one not sell his/her stock, but no one can buy it either. That can ham-string a company at a critical time. And don't think that stockholders, current or potential, won't pay attention to that kind of thing. It's in their nature to do so, less they loose their investment all the more foolishly.
Oh, wait... were you thinking in terms of the individual investor, the guy who puts in between 10,000 and 100,000 bucks? No, my friend, I'm talking about the institutional investors, the ones with more money to invest than the value of all small-cap and many medium-cap corporations. Those are the people who will pull up stakes as soon as trading resumes, and trust me, that kind of sell-off is not something from which a company can easily recover.
On the post: Why It Makes No Sense To Call Websites 'Common Carriers'
Never expect logic, or loyalty [or honor--I could go on, and on], from a politician, and you'll never be disappointed, in politicians anyway.
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Wait…
And my absolute abhorrence in that regard is well documented. We are way to involved in other states.
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Somehow supporting secure borders and levelling international trade (and right to keep a firearm) became Trump worship? Despite those ideas predating trump by, human history?
On various four point tests I strongly fall left libertarian
How far left or down depends on the questions asked. But always left libertarian.
The only place I fall into line with Republicans is the topic of defence.
And there only partially.
On the post: Trump's Truth Social Bakes Section 230 Directly Into Its Terms, So Apparently Trump Now Likes Section 230
Re: Re: Re:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_incest_in_the_United_States
Or
…/wiki/Legality_of_incest
Homosexuality and anal sex were once illegal as well. Mind you. Doesn’t make it right or wrong.
Outside of age of consent, a wholly different topic, the government should just stay out of people’s sex lived.
Funny, that’s what so many myth believers say about homosexuality. Etc.
Next >>