"you can't force the government to quell public speech on private property"
Actually yes I can. When I tell you that you're no longer welcome on my property and when you refuse to leave that's called trespassing. I can call the police and have you arrested for trespassing. Then your little verbal tirade about whatever the hell are you babbling about ends.
No I wouldn't be okay with that. The only thing that should be filtering my search results is what I put in not what Google wants me to see based on their political bias.
Google is not keeping your internet activity private. They are selling that shit as quickly as they can to advertisers. This includes your email by the way.
Not that any of what she says matters because she has zero chance of winning the election. Liberals, whether you like it or not Joe Biden will be your nominee. Old Guard big money Democrats will not let anyone else become the nominee.
If one in five people visit your website then link to other websites you can control most of the traffic by filtering what those people see on your website. If you was a company lean heavily to the left and you want people to only see points of view on the left you will by default hide and suppress political viewpoints that oppose your own. that controls the narrative. that controls what people see.
Contrary to popular belief it ceases to become a First Amendment protected activity when it occurs on private property and when the government is not involved. So basically you can take your protest and shove it up your ass.
I find it disingenuous that libtards in general worry more about Russians interfering with our election then illegal immigrants who by law are not allowed to vote in our elections. You can't have your cake and eat it too if the Russians or ukrainians are not allowed to interfere in our elections that neither are Mexican and other Central American citizens.
So here's the $50,000 question. How do the cops know that the bank robbers were either Google/Android users or even had cell phones on them at all? Perhaps they are Apple users. Perhaps they didn't have any cell phone on them at all. Yet another fishing expedition that infringes on people's rights and resulted in no actionable intelligence.
This is a knee-jerk reaction by an idiot politician full of nothing but idiotic ideas. They're just throwing shit out there to see what sticks to the wall purely for votes. There are no anti-gun laws that can be crafted that will take the guns out of the hands of criminals. Murder is already illegal. Would you like to make it super illegal? If the crime of murder and the punishment related to it and the laws in relation to it aren't enough to stop a mass murderer then literally nothing else will. The best we can do is to adequately prepare ourselves eventuality that this will happen again. In other words to learn how to protect yourself, your friends and your family.
What the you mean silly made-up controversy? I saw the video myself he assaulted that woman. He put his hands on her without her permission, that is assault. You want to know where the anti-conservative bias in the internet lies? Take a hard look in the mirror.
i have always disagreed with that statement. as we all have personal information, things or documents in our possession that we want to hide and keep private even though we have genuinely done nothing wrong or even anything close to it.
except that when the telcos attempt to think about replacing the unions, the unions just line the telcos pockets with cash (stolen from their workers) and the telco forgets all about doing anything but what the union demands
(untitled comment)
"...but that's not a legitimate reason to abuse copyright law..."
It's not like that's actually stopped anyone from abusing copyright law before.
(untitled comment)
Or could it be that The Whistleblower has zero credibility and was fed the entire thing by DNC operatives
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"you can't force the government to quell public speech on private property"
Actually yes I can. When I tell you that you're no longer welcome on my property and when you refuse to leave that's called trespassing. I can call the police and have you arrested for trespassing. Then your little verbal tirade about whatever the hell are you babbling about ends.
Re: Re: Have you tried digging up yet?
No I wouldn't be okay with that. The only thing that should be filtering my search results is what I put in not what Google wants me to see based on their political bias.
(untitled comment)
Google is not keeping your internet activity private. They are selling that shit as quickly as they can to advertisers. This includes your email by the way.
(untitled comment)
Not that any of what she says matters because she has zero chance of winning the election. Liberals, whether you like it or not Joe Biden will be your nominee. Old Guard big money Democrats will not let anyone else become the nominee.
Re: Re:
If one in five people visit your website then link to other websites you can control most of the traffic by filtering what those people see on your website. If you was a company lean heavily to the left and you want people to only see points of view on the left you will by default hide and suppress political viewpoints that oppose your own. that controls the narrative. that controls what people see.
Re: Re:
Your first amendment rights end where my property rights begin.
(untitled comment)
Contrary to popular belief it ceases to become a First Amendment protected activity when it occurs on private property and when the government is not involved. So basically you can take your protest and shove it up your ass.
(untitled comment)
I find it disingenuous that libtards in general worry more about Russians interfering with our election then illegal immigrants who by law are not allowed to vote in our elections. You can't have your cake and eat it too if the Russians or ukrainians are not allowed to interfere in our elections that neither are Mexican and other Central American citizens.
(untitled comment)
I would stop holding my breath and start getting my resume together.
(untitled comment)
So here's the $50,000 question. How do the cops know that the bank robbers were either Google/Android users or even had cell phones on them at all? Perhaps they are Apple users. Perhaps they didn't have any cell phone on them at all. Yet another fishing expedition that infringes on people's rights and resulted in no actionable intelligence.
(untitled comment)
This is a knee-jerk reaction by an idiot politician full of nothing but idiotic ideas. They're just throwing shit out there to see what sticks to the wall purely for votes. There are no anti-gun laws that can be crafted that will take the guns out of the hands of criminals. Murder is already illegal. Would you like to make it super illegal? If the crime of murder and the punishment related to it and the laws in relation to it aren't enough to stop a mass murderer then literally nothing else will. The best we can do is to adequately prepare ourselves eventuality that this will happen again. In other words to learn how to protect yourself, your friends and your family.
(untitled comment)
What the you mean silly made-up controversy? I saw the video myself he assaulted that woman. He put his hands on her without her permission, that is assault. You want to know where the anti-conservative bias in the internet lies? Take a hard look in the mirror.
(untitled comment) (as Falindraun)
Re: Re: (as Falindraun)
(untitled comment) (as Falindraun)
(untitled comment) (as Falindraun)
Re: Their own words against them ... (as Falindraun)
Re: Re: (as Falindraun)
More comments from GS >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by GS.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt