"That Spotify would stand by a show that consistently undermines vaccines and blithely spreads misinformation is disappointing--but, financially, it’s perfectly predictable."
It is difficult to comprehend the towering ignorance of the person who wrote that above.
Joe Rogan had a conversation with the inventor of the vaccine technology. The doctor holds 9 patents on that technology. So, in your blithely jaundiced view talking about "vaccines" that: 1) don't work,, and 2) have a larger injure/kill rate that all vaccines previous put together that means that the doctor that invented the vaccines is undermining them?
Moving on, do you even know what the definition of blithely is? "In a happy and carefree manner." So to translate your phrase, Joe Rogan happily and carefree-edly spreads misinformation? What misinformation would that be? The doctor that invented the technology is misinformed? How would you know? You are apparently saying you know more about the vaccines than the guy who invented them. And you have determined that that doctor is happily spreading misinformation.....about his own vaccines. And Rogan is chatting with him about it.
And the above is somehow "disappointing" to you that Spotify "sides" with a conversation between a prestigious doctor and Joe Rogan? Can you tell us once again what is disappointing to you about that?
The truth is that neither Neil Young nor you have listened to that conversation. Meaning you don't know what you are talking about. Isn't it about time that you stopped spreading misinformation?
Just for the record: nothing should be moderated by anyone ever. If Trump does it? It's stupid and wrong. If Nunes does it? It's stupid and wrong. Nunes should have other things to do. So should Trump.
A hissy fit? So, when your internet provider shuts you down because they don't like what you say will you be throwing a "hissy" fit? Is that what you will call it when you are de-platformed by the monopolies?
When you don't like what an organization says you love it when they are shut down. It's a private business!!! you scream. The completely correct analogy that these services are just like you ordering a phone line for your house--the phone company has no business monitoring what you say on your line. It's apparently beyond your comprehension.
De-platforming for any reason ever is un-American. Stop crowing about some group you don't agree with and loving that they are shut down and muzzled.
How bout you write articles on things Americans care about? Like the homeless in Frisco?
The opioid crisis maybe?
But the Ughyrs/Uighurs/Wiggers??????
Aren't those the Muslim terrorists in the underbelly of a foreign country? Are you an American? Give me 1 reasons why what a Wigger is doing 10,000 miles away from Market Street poopsters and smack shooters has to do with, uh,, the price of tea in China?
P.S., Chamath Palihapitiya should never ever ever ever have backtracked for telling the truth. It won't get you anywhere Chamath least of all with the writers of Tech Dirt. Belieee that.
So let me get this straight: You are against censorship and cancelling........unless you don't like the people speaking and you don't like what they are saying.
Wow, that's some stunning stupidity. Guess you forgot: they coming for you next.
You should be defending speech. Should be. But you're not. One sided censorship is still censorship. And dirty tricks like deplatforming should be punished severely. Shame on DirectTV. Shame on you for supporting it.
"A handful of Proud Boys members charged with crimes related to the January 6th raid on the Capitol building are arguing their actions are protected by the First Amendment."
They are.
" According to the defendants, the raid they participated in was nothing more than a protest."
Correct. It was a protest against the rampant fraud of the election that everyone could see and knows occurred.
"Alternatively, they're arguing one of the laws being used against them is unconstitutionally overbroad, turning otherwise legal activity into illegal activity."
And they are obviously correct. So why would you not be supporting their law suit? Because you are for fascist totalitarians?
You apparently think that might makes right? I mean why would anyone who is for democracy write such an article? Weird. Worse than weird.
Since every single official government stat on violent crime reveals that blacks commit 5 to 7 times the violent crimes than whites or any other race, that would mean:
AI would be correct in thinking blacks commit more crimes and should be policed accordingly (therefore AI is not wrong or whatever it is you are trying to say, which you should know anyway: AI can't be biased! AI isn't human. AI doesn't have emotions!)
Therefore old school policing is not biased. At all. Period.
Stereotypes are generated for a reason having nothing to do with bias and are extremely useful to humans. That's why we all use stereotypes all of the time in the process of life and survival.
"At issue is that the NY Times apparently got access to some memos that Project Veritas's lawyer had sent to Project Veritas,..."
Hmm, so the NYTimes colludes with the FBI and other State operators to get fed [by the politicized Feds illegally] privileged and proprietary information and a judge bars them because of their cheating illegal behavior?
And you say "apparnetly?" Yeah, sure, dude.
The judge was not confused. You are. You apparently think that PV's getting tons of blabbing devils to admit on camera everything from outright censorship to phonying up their news and their stories is some kind of despicable process, when PV is apparently the only honest and groundbreaking journalist on the field.
You apparently love to smear journalism. What a hypocrite you are. You'll be censored and smeared next time, buddy.
Apparently you are unable to see long term. You're too angry about journalists reporting the facts. Apparently something is bad wrong with your ability to do journalism or at the very least to create impartial commentary.
"Texas consumers recently learned the hard way that regulatory capture can prove to be fatal."
Yes, the capture by the green and climate warming hoax groups certainly did prove fatal. Convincing a state that it will never be cold again so shut down your fossil fuel plants? Fatal. Wind turbines don't turn in the snowy winter with low breezes. Solar cells don't function when covered with snow.
Texas got captured buy this dangerous evangelists and people died. Has Texas learned anything from that? This article would imply that they have not.
Since the push began about 3 decades ago to pretend that prostitution is sex trafficking, it's been obvious that they would soon come after porn as well.
These rabid anti-sex grifters somehow succeeded in labeling all sex industry as "trafficking" a mythical practice that hardly exists anywhere on earth.
It's just another iteration of the puritan, feminist (among other groups)-based, war on agency that has been going on more or less since the early 1900s.
They never give up and it's been a real disappointment that it looks like they got away with the relabeling and are just moving on to new prohibitions.
The only surprise is that you are surprised in any way by this.
You don't kick a person off a platform because you think they are wrong. You let them speak and then see how what they say and think holds up.
It's called freedom. Try it some time. One day, law suits for this kind of un-Americana garbage will win every single time. Sue them out of existence. They deserve it.
Since everyone on Earth knows the election was stolen via Dominion machines, it's hard to understand why writers at Tech Dirt would support censorship and totalitarianism via these SLAPP suits.
Still nothing about discovery. Has Dominion been forced to show their code yet? I don't know, but I doubt it. Dominion continues to bluff.
Their bluff will be called. Get on the side of fairness and democracy. You are not there with these articles.
Sydney may or may not have to pay some outrageous nonsense of a fine or penalty. There are remedies to the corrupt court system that you appear to worship.
Why crow like a peacock on speed? Wtf is wrong with you, dude? If that were your grandma? You'd be dancing on her grave simply because she was looking for some justice. Who cares you yowl! So it's my grandma? I just care that she suffers! Yay! That's America. And that's Tech Dirt.
Hawley doesn't like censorship. Editorial choices have no place or no play in the public square, which is what Twitter occupies. Time for American values not the values of an Indian overclass which has taken over Twitter. Time to break up Twitter completely.
Try to understand:
If a cop decides that he or she needs to arrest you, that means that he or she has decided that you have or are violating a law that the community has passed and is in favor of.
This means that you don't get to leave or run. Arrest means to stop. He or she is stopping from being in the community. In other words, you are a danger to the community if you run or resist. The reason is simple: if you are indeed a violator of laws the community has passed by democratic vote, then if you are let out into the community without first being arrested and tried and sentenced then you could do more harm to the community more than you already have done or are doing now.
So running or resisting? That means you are a dangerous out of control zombie criminal. You must be stopped. You have been ordered to stop. You have dangerously decided you do not need to obey the laws your fellow citizens have passed in order to have an ordered community.
If you die are killed? Who is the person protecting the community from the law breaker who will not submit to the will of the community? The guy getting shot.
The cop was doing his or her job. Get these clear principles through your head and stop capping on cops.
And stop resisting arrest. And stop running from the police!!!!!
Thank you for this fine, fine article. I had known about this issue for several decades, knew that Holmes regretted his throwaway line, but had no idea it had never been a part of law, never knew that the line had been repudiated in a later Supreme Court decision.
This is one of the few articles on this issue that appear here that inform me and give me immense pleasure to read.
Science
"That Spotify would stand by a show that consistently undermines vaccines and blithely spreads misinformation is disappointing--but, financially, it’s perfectly predictable."
It is difficult to comprehend the towering ignorance of the person who wrote that above.
Joe Rogan had a conversation with the inventor of the vaccine technology. The doctor holds 9 patents on that technology. So, in your blithely jaundiced view talking about "vaccines" that: 1) don't work,, and 2) have a larger injure/kill rate that all vaccines previous put together that means that the doctor that invented the vaccines is undermining them?
Moving on, do you even know what the definition of blithely is? "In a happy and carefree manner." So to translate your phrase, Joe Rogan happily and carefree-edly spreads misinformation? What misinformation would that be? The doctor that invented the technology is misinformed? How would you know? You are apparently saying you know more about the vaccines than the guy who invented them. And you have determined that that doctor is happily spreading misinformation.....about his own vaccines. And Rogan is chatting with him about it.
And the above is somehow "disappointing" to you that Spotify "sides" with a conversation between a prestigious doctor and Joe Rogan? Can you tell us once again what is disappointing to you about that?
The truth is that neither Neil Young nor you have listened to that conversation. Meaning you don't know what you are talking about. Isn't it about time that you stopped spreading misinformation?
For the Recored
Just for the record: nothing should be moderated by anyone ever. If Trump does it? It's stupid and wrong. If Nunes does it? It's stupid and wrong. Nunes should have other things to do. So should Trump.
A What?
A hissy fit? So, when your internet provider shuts you down because they don't like what you say will you be throwing a "hissy" fit? Is that what you will call it when you are de-platformed by the monopolies?
When you don't like what an organization says you love it when they are shut down. It's a private business!!! you scream. The completely correct analogy that these services are just like you ordering a phone line for your house--the phone company has no business monitoring what you say on your line. It's apparently beyond your comprehension.
De-platforming for any reason ever is un-American. Stop crowing about some group you don't agree with and loving that they are shut down and muzzled.
They coming for you one day.
It's the Big Things
On this article? What Chamath Palihapitiya said.
How bout you write articles on things Americans care about? Like the homeless in Frisco?
The opioid crisis maybe?
But the Ughyrs/Uighurs/Wiggers??????
Aren't those the Muslim terrorists in the underbelly of a foreign country? Are you an American? Give me 1 reasons why what a Wigger is doing 10,000 miles away from Market Street poopsters and smack shooters has to do with, uh,, the price of tea in China?
P.S., Chamath Palihapitiya should never ever ever ever have backtracked for telling the truth. It won't get you anywhere Chamath least of all with the writers of Tech Dirt. Belieee that.
Stunning
So let me get this straight: You are against censorship and cancelling........unless you don't like the people speaking and you don't like what they are saying.
Wow, that's some stunning stupidity. Guess you forgot: they coming for you next.
You should be defending speech. Should be. But you're not. One sided censorship is still censorship. And dirty tricks like deplatforming should be punished severely. Shame on DirectTV. Shame on you for supporting it.
Say What?
"A handful of Proud Boys members charged with crimes related to the January 6th raid on the Capitol building are arguing their actions are protected by the First Amendment."
They are.
" According to the defendants, the raid they participated in was nothing more than a protest."
Correct. It was a protest against the rampant fraud of the election that everyone could see and knows occurred.
"Alternatively, they're arguing one of the laws being used against them is unconstitutionally overbroad, turning otherwise legal activity into illegal activity."
And they are obviously correct. So why would you not be supporting their law suit? Because you are for fascist totalitarians?
You apparently think that might makes right? I mean why would anyone who is for democracy write such an article? Weird. Worse than weird.
Say What?
iMPARTIAL
Since every single official government stat on violent crime reveals that blacks commit 5 to 7 times the violent crimes than whites or any other race, that would mean:
(untitled comment)
"At issue is that the NY Times apparently got access to some memos that Project Veritas's lawyer had sent to Project Veritas,..."
Hmm, so the NYTimes colludes with the FBI and other State operators to get fed [by the politicized Feds illegally] privileged and proprietary information and a judge bars them because of their cheating illegal behavior?
And you say "apparnetly?" Yeah, sure, dude.
The judge was not confused. You are. You apparently think that PV's getting tons of blabbing devils to admit on camera everything from outright censorship to phonying up their news and their stories is some kind of despicable process, when PV is apparently the only honest and groundbreaking journalist on the field.
You apparently love to smear journalism. What a hypocrite you are. You'll be censored and smeared next time, buddy.
Apparently you are unable to see long term. You're too angry about journalists reporting the facts. Apparently something is bad wrong with your ability to do journalism or at the very least to create impartial commentary.
Green
"Texas consumers recently learned the hard way that regulatory capture can prove to be fatal."
Yes, the capture by the green and climate warming hoax groups certainly did prove fatal. Convincing a state that it will never be cold again so shut down your fossil fuel plants? Fatal. Wind turbines don't turn in the snowy winter with low breezes. Solar cells don't function when covered with snow.
Texas got captured buy this dangerous evangelists and people died. Has Texas learned anything from that? This article would imply that they have not.
Obvious
Since the push began about 3 decades ago to pretend that prostitution is sex trafficking, it's been obvious that they would soon come after porn as well.
These rabid anti-sex grifters somehow succeeded in labeling all sex industry as "trafficking" a mythical practice that hardly exists anywhere on earth.
It's just another iteration of the puritan, feminist (among other groups)-based, war on agency that has been going on more or less since the early 1900s.
They never give up and it's been a real disappointment that it looks like they got away with the relabeling and are just moving on to new prohibitions.
The only surprise is that you are surprised in any way by this.
Ecpectatoion
What do you expect coming from the Moron who immediately claimed that Milo Y. had hired antifa to disrupt his own speech at UC Berkeley?
I mean after that, how could you think he had anything at all to say of any relevance, logic, or value?
Proper
You don't kick a person off a platform because you think they are wrong. You let them speak and then see how what they say and think holds up.
It's called freedom. Try it some time. One day, law suits for this kind of un-Americana garbage will win every single time. Sue them out of existence. They deserve it.
Dominion
Since everyone on Earth knows the election was stolen via Dominion machines, it's hard to understand why writers at Tech Dirt would support censorship and totalitarianism via these SLAPP suits.
Still nothing about discovery. Has Dominion been forced to show their code yet? I don't know, but I doubt it. Dominion continues to bluff.
Their bluff will be called. Get on the side of fairness and democracy. You are not there with these articles.
Snark is stupid.
Speech
This article is seen in the dictionary under the definition of hate speech.
Powell
Dude, why are you sniggering?
So quick to be nasty. That's you.
Sydney may or may not have to pay some outrageous nonsense of a fine or penalty. There are remedies to the corrupt court system that you appear to worship.
Why crow like a peacock on speed? Wtf is wrong with you, dude? If that were your grandma? You'd be dancing on her grave simply because she was looking for some justice. Who cares you yowl! So it's my grandma? I just care that she suffers! Yay! That's America. And that's Tech Dirt.
Companion
What a great completion of your Hawley report! Twitter is insane. It's a form of totalitarian lunacy. Thanks for writing this article.
Au contraire
Hawley doesn't like censorship. Editorial choices have no place or no play in the public square, which is what Twitter occupies. Time for American values not the values of an Indian overclass which has taken over Twitter. Time to break up Twitter completely.
Ideas
Try to understand:
If a cop decides that he or she needs to arrest you, that means that he or she has decided that you have or are violating a law that the community has passed and is in favor of.
This means that you don't get to leave or run. Arrest means to stop. He or she is stopping from being in the community. In other words, you are a danger to the community if you run or resist. The reason is simple: if you are indeed a violator of laws the community has passed by democratic vote, then if you are let out into the community without first being arrested and tried and sentenced then you could do more harm to the community more than you already have done or are doing now.
So running or resisting? That means you are a dangerous out of control zombie criminal. You must be stopped. You have been ordered to stop. You have dangerously decided you do not need to obey the laws your fellow citizens have passed in order to have an ordered community.
If you die are killed? Who is the person protecting the community from the law breaker who will not submit to the will of the community? The guy getting shot.
The cop was doing his or her job. Get these clear principles through your head and stop capping on cops.
And stop resisting arrest. And stop running from the police!!!!!
Just Stop!!!
Fire
Thank you for this fine, fine article. I had known about this issue for several decades, knew that Holmes regretted his throwaway line, but had no idea it had never been a part of law, never knew that the line had been repudiated in a later Supreme Court decision.
This is one of the few articles on this issue that appear here that inform me and give me immense pleasure to read.
Thanks again.
More comments from restless94110 >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by restless94110.
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