At a minimum they have to get rid of those signs that display your speed since even a reasonable adult might find it moderately enjoyable to hit 2x the limit.
They've started just flashing SLOW DOWN after 5 over the limit for exactly that reason.
Did you reply to the wrong comment? If not, I don't know how you could read my comment as arguing that the law doesn't matter. I am arguing that section 230 doesn't say "you can dismiss any lawsuit you want if you have an app or a web site".
This is the very kind of scam Section 230 was supposed to protect against.
No, section 230 was designed to protect users and companies from being held liable for the speech of others. That is not what is happening here. It says so right in the story:
The plaintiffs don't claim Snapchat isn't a publisher of third-party content. They don't even argue this lawsuit centers on the "speed filter" post made shortly before the accident. Instead, they argue the app itself -- with its attendant (but now removed) "speed filter" -- is negligently-designed, leading directly to the tragedies at the center of this suit.
I don't know if the lawsuit should succeed or be tossed immediately for some other reason or what, but it's appropriate IMO not to dismiss it via 230.
No. The purpose of a speedometer is to display the current speed to the operator of a vehicle. The purpose of this feature is to share one's current speed with other people in other places. Anyone could have predicted such a feature would lead to idiots doing stupid things like this and getting hurt or killed. We can't even trust people not to eat toxic chemicals for internet points; it was beyond obvious what was going to happen with this.
From that, we see it reduced to one simple statement - you are responsible for your actions, period.
Correct. Snap is being sued over their actions: how they designed their app.
Herein, we see the plaintiff (the parents) attempting to bypass the State's mandate to drive responsibly.
Are you under the impression that if there was one wrong committed by one party (reckless driving), there cannot also be another wrong committed by another party? Does the lawsuit make any claim that the driver was driving responsibly? Does it make any attempt to hold another party responsible for the driving?
What are the chances many of these bills are designed to do nothing other than ensure that the campaign contributions from the big internet companies keep coming in? We know legislators will sometimes announce they're "considering" introducing legislation on a topic just to whip the lobbyists into a frenzy.
Re: Re: I have a problem figuring out what took so long.
Where is the data that shows the franking and label printing activity stored? Presumably by the faulty software.
The point is that the worker was supposed to take that 10 pound note and put it in the drawer in exchange for the service, and did so. So why is it possible to prosecute workers for taking money, when the money isn't actually missing?
A deeper look into SEC filings shows "Chesapeake" is an apparernt subsidiary of Sinclair Broadcasting, a known purveyor of right-wing, Fascist-leaning crap among its television content. Albeit, this in no way justifies the Mayor's abhorrent attempt at governmental prior restraint.
Then why would you consider that omission so critical as to call the article "woefully incomplete"?
owned by a company with a history of cutting these things off if they're not an immediate success.
Actually it's worse than that. Sometimes they cut services off after running them for years, so you can't even assume it will be maintained just because it's been around for a year or more.
I don't think that "Facebook made it easier for a con artist to grift his base" is really a selling point to how it's supposedly invaluable to modern politics.
I think the point is that without Facebook, it may become much harder for Trump to get reelected if he decides to run again. So I hope the ban is permanent.
Also, the real questions are simply - did Trump deserve to get kicked off Facebook for his actions, and was he given adequate warning before action was taken.
I don't think those are still questions for any reality based people. The question now is whether the ban should be permanent, or his account should be reinstated at some point.
Even Iran issued a fatwah on ISIS, with the chief poo-bahs of Shi'ite Islam all condemning the "new caliphate" as blasphemers and apostates, very early on.
It's not that impressive that the Shia are condemning the Sunnis. If other Sunnis did it too, that's more encouraging.
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re:
They've started just flashing SLOW DOWN after 5 over the limit for exactly that reason.
On the post: Cable Lobby Working Hard To Ensure Biden Broadband Plan Doesn't Encourage Real Competition
Re: Re: Re:
You do understand the difference between the President of the United States and your municipal government, right?
On the post: Estate Of 'Tintin' Comic Creator Loses On Fair Use Grounds To Artist Putting Tintin Alongside Women
Re: Estate of?
Of course. All the ones that don't get in the news because they're just doing what estates are supposed to do.
On the post: Cable Lobby Working Hard To Ensure Biden Broadband Plan Doesn't Encourage Real Competition
Bad link
The huddling in the dirt link just goes back to this story.
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re: Re: Re:
Did you reply to the wrong comment? If not, I don't know how you could read my comment as arguing that the law doesn't matter. I am arguing that section 230 doesn't say "you can dismiss any lawsuit you want if you have an app or a web site".
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re:
No, section 230 was designed to protect users and companies from being held liable for the speech of others. That is not what is happening here. It says so right in the story:
I don't know if the lawsuit should succeed or be tossed immediately for some other reason or what, but it's appropriate IMO not to dismiss it via 230.
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re: Re: Re: WTF is/was the speed filter?
No. The purpose of a speedometer is to display the current speed to the operator of a vehicle. The purpose of this feature is to share one's current speed with other people in other places. Anyone could have predicted such a feature would lead to idiots doing stupid things like this and getting hurt or killed. We can't even trust people not to eat toxic chemicals for internet points; it was beyond obvious what was going to happen with this.
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re: Re:
Correct. Snap is being sued over their actions: how they designed their app.
Are you under the impression that if there was one wrong committed by one party (reckless driving), there cannot also be another wrong committed by another party? Does the lawsuit make any claim that the driver was driving responsibly? Does it make any attempt to hold another party responsible for the driving?
On the post: One Developer Gets GTA3 And Vice City Source Code Un-DMCAd On GitHub
20 years
That sounded older than I expected so I had to go look it up (not being a player of the series). The first one came out in 1997!
On the post: Study Finds US Broadband Gaps Three Times Worse Than The FCC Claims
Re: Maths
42 divided by 14.5 is 2.9. Which is "roughly three".
On the post: Bad Section 230 Bills Come From Both Sides Of The Aisle: Schakowsky/Castor Bill Would Be A Disaster For The Open Internet
Contributions?
What are the chances many of these bills are designed to do nothing other than ensure that the campaign contributions from the big internet companies keep coming in? We know legislators will sometimes announce they're "considering" introducing legislation on a topic just to whip the lobbyists into a frenzy.
On the post: UK Court Overturns 39 Convictions Of Post Office Workers Caused By Buggy Software
Re: Re: I have a problem figuring out what took so long.
The point is that the worker was supposed to take that 10 pound note and put it in the drawer in exchange for the service, and did so. So why is it possible to prosecute workers for taking money, when the money isn't actually missing?
On the post: Baltimore Prosecutor Asks FCC To Go After Local News Broadcasters She Doesn't Like
Re:
Then why would you consider that omission so critical as to call the article "woefully incomplete"?
On the post: Stadia Exodus Continues As Product Head For Stadia Exits
Re:
Actually it's worse than that. Sometimes they cut services off after running them for years, so you can't even assume it will be maintained just because it's been around for a year or more.
On the post: The Oversight Board's Decision On Facebook's Trump Ban Is Just Not That Important
Re: Re: Re:
I think the point is that without Facebook, it may become much harder for Trump to get reelected if he decides to run again. So I hope the ban is permanent.
I don't think those are still questions for any reality based people. The question now is whether the ban should be permanent, or his account should be reinstated at some point.
On the post: The Oversight Board's Decision On Facebook's Trump Ban Is Just Not That Important
Re: Articulable, consistent rules...
Which is of course not what happened.
It's never going to be the rule of law. At most, it will be the rule of a private company's terms of service.
On the post: The Oversight Board's Decision On Facebook's Trump Ban Is Just Not That Important
Re:
It might be a lot more important than that. Facebook is much more than just another place to spew toxic nonsense.
https://www.npr.org/2021/05/06/994063372/why-facebooks-decision-on-trump-could-be-make-or- break-for-his-political-future
On the post: Verizon's UltraFast 5G Can Only Be Accessed 0.8% Of The Time
Data
And apparently on 5G you don't have a data cap! Sometimes. Maybe.
https://stopthecap.com/2020/09/28/verizons-unlimited-confusion-plus-plan-now-really-means-30- gb-data-cap-except-when-its-50-gb/
On the post: The Washington Post Thought It Might Be Nice To Provide Free Book Marketing To Insurrectionist Josh Hawley
Re: Re: Re:
It's not that impressive that the Shia are condemning the Sunnis. If other Sunnis did it too, that's more encouraging.
On the post: Rep. Lauren Boebert Decides To Streisand Parody Site Making Fun Of Her, Threatens To Take Legal Action Against It
Re: Re: Re: Not quite a fan of the 2nd amendment
You very clearly do not, since you were replying to a joke*.
They are.
You think everyone shooting guns is killing stuff? Never heard of target shooting? Skeet shooting?
* also possible I don't get it, if you were also joking, but your comment doesn't read like a joke to me.
Next >>