Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[martinuzz]

Twitter could always just pack up and leave.
Hey Twitter, come, the Netherlands has an excellent investor's climate for companies like yours!  Trump fact-checking links are now tax deductable!

And we probably have most of your server farms here already anyways.

[Lord Shonus]

Exactly - and every other elected official does not want that to happen, let alone the risk inherent in making a personal enemy out of major media outlet.

[Zangi]

I am not sure if this is good news, or bad news.  I think it is both at the same time.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/27/fisa-renewal-limbo-284025


Good news: FISA is not getting reauthorized at this time. (Secret courts with secret rulings and secret procedures have no place in a democratic republic like ours, that operates on public representation.)

Bad News:  It got scrubbed because the legislature is being led around by the testicles by the executive-- and by a whiny orange and petulant child of an executive at that.

Only takes someone who would openly abuse it’s functions to want to temporarily close the secret courts.  Back to business once literally anyone else gets in.

[McTraveller]

That's just going 110% fascist right now.

EDIT: Twitter should just play chicken with El Presidente. Kick him off for breach of the terms of service. I'm sure they can dredge up enough examples.

Do people really not see the danger in the de facto sources of all information being able to control what information is presented?  I'm firmly in the camp that believes the cure to misinformation isn't allowing media outlets to decide what is and isn't incorrect, but rather teach your population how to determine that in the first place.  Put another way: you can't solve stupid by censorship; you can only solve stupid by education.  And I mean education in critical thinking processes, not by presenting two opposing views - generally with some bias in presentation favoring one over the other.

The US protections for freedom of speech were in place because at the time only governments were big enough and had enough reach to "control the narrative".  Now we have given that power to the media companies, and they have no such prohibition - they hide behind "freedom of speech only applies to governments, we are private companies so we can decide what to publish" arguments.

Social media should be regulated: but not regulated so they have to delete/restrict certain material. They should instead be regulated so they cannot restrict such "contrarian" material.  The only type of restrictions I can see fall into this category:  If the material is something you would not want put on the TV screens in your elementary school, it can be restricted.  Because, after all, elementary school kids do use social media these days...

[Frumple]

If the material is something you would not want put on the TV screens in your elementary school, it can be restricted.  Because, after all, elementary school kids do use social media these days...

Hahaha that would delete like 90+% of twitter, probably most of social media period. Trump (and most of the republican party at a minimum) would promptly get booted off the platform, ha.

I get the feeling you haven't had any exposure to TV material aimed at elementary school kids any time in the last, like... ever.

[TamerVirus]

Hahaha that would delete like 90+% of twitter, probably most of social media period.

I see this as an absolute win.
Splinter social media in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds

[Frumple]

Yeah, seriously tho' locking social media down to elementary school level would be a censorship regime the likes of which I don't think the world's ever seen before. It would bloody crush most "contrarian" material, and most other sorts, too. It would be incredible in the same way the tumblr disaster was, amplified by a few orders of magnitude. The fireworks would be amazing, but if that's a person's idea of limited regulation I hope to every hell they never get involved in any regulatory projects

[McTraveller]

Ok for context I grew up in the early 80s.  Our TV and other media was by no means "puritanical." 

What I mean by "things you wouldn't put in elementary school" is what I said: gore (I'm talking execution videos, not stylized violence), profanity for profanity's sake (i'm talking about Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back level, not Back to the Future level), and explicit sex.

We watched the news, we watched HBO behind our parents' backs, all the typical stuff.  But this wasn't the type of propaganda we have today; the science and tools just weren't there.

Maybe to clarify - don't pick apart my stance because of the details; I trust you all know what I meant. 

[SalmonGod]

What's happening in Minneapolis is what should happen every time police murder somone.

Also, without social media, there would be no alternative source of information about what's going on there, and most police murders would never become public knowledge.

[Bumber]

What's happening in Minneapolis is what should happen every time police murder somone.

Maybe not the arson, tho.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

That's the most important part. When there is no justice, there must be no peace.

[TamerVirus]

If you're protesting something, burning down your own neighborhood will just lead to headaches in the morning.
The answer is to burn down someone else's neighborhood

[SalmonGod]

What's happening in Minneapolis is what should happen every time police murder somone.

Maybe not the arson, tho.

Yeah, even the arson.  Not indiscriminate, but it supports the function of a riot.  And the destruction in Minneapolis has not been indiscriminate.  I'm watching a 2 1/2 hour video of the scene near the 3rd precinct as the condo building burns down.  Minority owned business left pristine.

When police murder shamelessly on full public display, it's an expression of power.  If the murderers are not treated like any other citizen would when they commit murder, then what you have isn't a justice system, it's a violent occupation.  By definition a situation that is not peaceful for those occupied.  Thus those occupied are justified in distributing that absence of peace, until peace for all is structurally guaranteed.

[TamerVirus]

What about looting then?

[SalmonGod]

What about looting then?

Why wouldn't they?  This economy wasn't built for them.  That's the real occupation.  The police are just the executive enforcers of it.  Looting is the purest, most direct backlash against that power structure.

Floyd was murdered for writing a check at a grocery store.

Edit:  Correction.  Writing a check is what I had heard.  Fact-checking myself, I'm seeing references to a $10 bill that the store suspected to be counterfeit.  Can't definitively determine which is true at the moment.  It's not a point any reporting is focusing on (surprisingly).  Either way, it was an issue of *suspected* currency forgery, and the point stands.