Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
AlexOak

Leaked Draft Shows potential Internet Censorship in the US.

Recommended Posts

United States of China


Awareness is key. Never enough, even in the face of futility. Speak the truth as if you may never get to say it again. This world is full of ugly. Change it they say. The only way is to reveal the ugly. To change the truth you must first acknowledge it. Never pretend it isn't there. Never bend the knee.

 

Please quote my post in your reply, so that I will be notified and can respond to it. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

United States of China

Silicon Valley of China

 

the US needs to force the Bill of Rights onto the internet. If Trump can't block anybody because it violates the first amendment then nobody else should be able to block anyone for that same reason either

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mr moose said:

Hahahahahahahahaha,  I am sure the 80odd% of Americans with only two options for Internet are more than happy with the "competitive" nature of the "free" market.

In those areas, ISPs are not operating in a free market. The market is regulated to hell for the benefit of the largest ISP.

 

5 hours ago, poochyena said:

You think not only should people's right to their property being taken away, but also punishing them for removing what they don't like?

False equivalence. These companies are abusing a law that offers certain immunity in civil law in exchange for neutral handling of information, as they are far from neutral.

 


And in the naked light I saw

Ten thousand people, maybe more.

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

You hardly have the same reach as any of these large platforms. You're comparing apples to oranges.

But then if you want to consider social media as a human right as opposed to a private endeavor then it shouldn't be private companies that control it, period. Since we do have private companies running them then I'd say it's their right to moderate the platforms however they like; when we bring them under state control then we can talk about what is or isn't allowed to be moderated. Not that it would change much since the protected class system would probably still end up getting racists and nazis banned.

6 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

The gov't would fund a standard allowance to all candidates and then allow for public financing from each citizen with a cap to how much can be given. 

If a candidate is rich and/or famous they would still have a significant advantage over everyone else as they would be able to personally afford or already have more advertisements.

6 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

See above. It would mean that candidates would be forced to move towards their constituency's desires. Don't like Medicare for All? You get no vote, thus no financial support from the populace. Want to give the middle class a tax cut? You get a vote, and possibly some financial gain from the populace.

That's already supposed to be how democracy works - the problem is that if you have 1000 different candidates pushing different programs and each gets 0.1% of the votes you're going to get nowhere. The de facto 2 party system in the US is stupid and the government should help smaller candidates get some time under the spotlight but completely removing the party structure is a bit unfeasible imo.

10 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

The left are already trying to censor the internet and the news via their control of large tech companies.

Lmao, "left" and "large companies" in the same sentence... big tech are centrists at best, maybe liberal if you want to stretch the definition a bit - they are definitely not leftists. And you have some gall complaining about "the left" pushing censorship when it's the right that removed net neutrality and is pushing for actual government mandated censorship with bills like this.

10 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

They already largely control our major educational facilities.

More like most people with a shred of education can see that most positions on the right are indefensible both logically and scientifically. I'm sorry that educated people think your political ideology makes no sense, does that offend you? Maybe slow down on the anti intellectualism and consider the possibility that you're just wrong?

10 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

I'd prefer harsh punishments for any organization that is blatantly suppressing the views of their opposition.

So... you have no problem with state censorship, you only pretend to care when private companies don't want to host your bullshit. Not that I had any doubts on the matter but it's nice to read it right from the horse's keyboard.

10 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Up to and including life in prison, for being an enemy of the state.

Sure, why not death camps while we're at it? We're pushing for political prisons now? I'll link this comment next time I see you complain about China or any sort of censorship.

11 hours ago, Trik'Stari said:

Which I define as anyone trying to subvert or destroy democracy (representative republic, what the fuck ever you want to call it. People have a fucking right to disagree with the state. Anyone attempting to prevent that should be locked up and the key destroyed, as a warning).

Ok, let's start with Donald Trump. That's literally what this bill is. If you disagree with what the government believes is appropriate moderation you suffer consequences; that's an attack on democracy and prevents people from disagreeing with the government. According to your own logic, that means life in prison for the entire Trump administration.


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It feels like this is (some) conservatives showing their true hand when it comes to online speech -- they claim it's about free speech, but it's really about forcing their ideology on others, actual civil liberties be damned.

 

Whatever your political allegiances, you should oppose this if it ever becomes reality.  Yeah, this is great for conservatives so long as the Trump regime is in power, but do you want the eventual Democrat presidency to hold similar sway?  It's feasible there would be a seesaw in online speech interpretations as parties shape the rules to fit their views.  The beauty of the current approach is that the government can't dictate what private companies publish unless there's a violation of some other law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Commodus said:

It feels like this is (some) conservatives showing their true hand when it comes to online speech -- they claim it's about free speech, but it's really about forcing their ideology on others, actual civil liberties be damned.

 

Whatever your political allegiances, you should oppose this if it ever becomes reality.  Yeah, this is great for conservatives so long as the Trump regime is in power, but do you want the eventual Democrat presidency to hold similar sway?  It's feasible there would be a seesaw in online speech interpretations as parties shape the rules to fit their views.  The beauty of the current approach is that the government can't dictate what private companies publish unless there's a violation of some other law.

Problem is the way it is now, the 'classic' media is very much unbalanced when it comes to political views. As such they hold great sway over the general publics opinion on certain things. Should a online platform allow full freedom of speech and expression, they are quickly demonized by the media as it doesnt fit their narrative. As such the general public will see such platforms as hate filled cesspools of debauchery, becouse thats what the media is telling them it is.

 

The result is the only successful platforms that exist are in fact biased. There is no successful platform that is truly unbiased because all those that are are quickly branded as 'bad' and are targeted for removal.

 

Just think of all the message boards that have been, and are trying be, taken down.

 

A bill to force platforms to be unbiased and censorship free is inevitable, it just has to be made in such a way that even the government cannot make opinionated decision on what violets the rules and what doesn't. It needs to be clearly defined so that regardless of whether the ruling government leans one way or the other, the end result is fair unbiased platforms.


CPU: Intel i7 3930k w/OC & EK Supremacy EVO Block | Motherboard: Asus P9x79 Pro  | RAM: G.Skill 4x4 1866 CL9 | PSU: Seasonic Platinum 1000w | VDU: Panasonic 42" Plasma |

GPU: Gigabyte 1080ti Gaming OC w/OC & Barrow Block | Sound: Asus Xonar D2X - Z5500 -FiiO X3K DAP/DAC - ATH-M50S | Case: Phantek Enthoo Primo White |

Storage: Samsung 850 Pro 1TB SSD + Samsung 850 Evo 256GB SSD | Cooling: XSPC D5 Photon 270 Res & Pump | 2x XSPC AX240 White Rads | NexXxos Monsta 80x240 Rad P/P |

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Sauron said:

That's government control of the internet, AKA actual censorship. And remember that if these companies are "held accountable" for what they take down they will also be held accountable for what they put up.

No, just no. All the executive order is doing is stripping social media sites of immunity from lawsuits unless they stop censoring political viewpoints. It is not doing ANY censoring whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

You hardly have the same reach as any of these large platforms. You're comparing apples to oranges. 

The gov't would fund a standard allowance to all candidates and then allow for public financing from each citizen with a cap to how much can be given. 

See above. It would mean that candidates would be forced to move towards their constituency's desires. Don't like Medicare for All? You get no vote, thus no financial support from the populace. Want to give the middle class a tax cut? You get a vote, and possibly some financial gain from the populace

ok so if i own a skyscraper in times square and someone wanted to buy an ad spot and put up a giant poop picture and i say no i should get fined for censorship

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spartaman64 said:

ok so if i own a skyscraper in times square and someone wanted to buy an ad spot and put up a giant poop picture and i say no i should get fined for censorship

To all the "Muh Free Speech" Neocons, yeah you should.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm genuinely curious many people here that are currently in favour of this bill would still be in favour if it were drafted by the Obama administration?  Or does it not matter which government controls the internet?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, poochyena said:

excuse me? What does that mean? You think not only should people's right to their property being taken away, but also punishing them for removing what they don't like?

How would you feel if someone put a bunch of Nazi lawn signs on your property, and then being punished for removing them?

 

Literally how would anyone run a campaign with no outside help? It would HEAVILY favor people who are rich and famous, since non-rich and famous people would have no way to get their name out there.

The problem is that Facebook, YouTube and Google are now acting more like Publishers, but don't want to be held liable as publishers. They are avoiding the regulation and responsibility that all publishers face, while also curating content. They want the Platform label, but want Publisher control. 

That's the issue here. Nothing more, nothing less. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump preparing for if Twitter ever bans him for violating their ToS.


anime sucks

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

No, just no. All the executive order is doing is stripping social media sites of immunity from lawsuits unless they stop censoring political viewpoints. It is not doing ANY censoring whatsoever.

No, the bill says that federal agencies can determine what can and cannot be removed from these platforms. Which is, by definition, censorship. And by the way, social media sites are not immune from lawsuits; you can sue them if they refuse to take down content that is illegal, such as copyrighted material. You can't sue them for banning you at their discretion though, because that's not illegal and it's a perfectly acceptable thing for them to do - it might make them bad platforms but it's definitely not a free speech issue. On the other hand, forcing them to host or promote content they otherwise wouldn't is 100% a form of censorship. Oh, and of course once something like this goes through the sky is the limit - the agencies could just decide that whatever they don't like should be removed; except this time if you refuse to comply you get a jail sentence.


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Majinhoju said:

I'm genuinely curious many people here that are currently in favour of this bill would still be in favour if it were drafted by the Obama administration?  Or does it not matter which government controls the internet?

image.png.60653540777fb1b286bd451623b89297.png


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Which is, by definition, censorship.

"It's not censorship if I agree with it!"


anime sucks

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is old and will most likely never get solved - who controls what kind of info gets "out there", especially in the internet, since everyone is more or less biased in some way.

Fake news and rumors spread far easier then legit info since people are more curious about drama and watching people getting accused of something.

Trump is doing extremely well by using fake news (while blaming "the media" for doing what he does) and a lot of doubtful other stuff. Just look at his last "oopsie" with blaming video games for bad stuff that recently happened. It just draws so much more attention then boring and well researched facts. Does that mean that Obama didn't do bad stuff and that there weren't tragedies in the US? No.

Liberals will always try to undermine Republicans, Republicans will always try to undermine Liberals - and in the current development its getting more and more extreme.

 

Who should be in charge of controlling the flow of information? You can call "controling it" censorship if it hits a certain level, but it can't be just let go of completely, look how much bad stuff happenes due to fake news and agendas trying to push their narratives.

It should be an independent agency that is bound to the truth and reliable facts. Duh. That will never happen since everyone who comes into power (be it left or right, mroe or less subtle, the results will go in the same direction) will try to install people/mechanics that benefit their political views.

 

Solution? SKYNET Kappa. No, seriously, get some sort of AI involved, programmed by ultranerds who care more about the Pizza toppings then who rules the country (don't take that last part word for word please, or i get crucified :D ). 

If people won't start to work together it will only get worse. Facts should outrule beliefs by all means, but facts seem to be at a lower value right now, which is ludicrous.


Current System:                                                           Planned System (x=still missing):

i7-3770k + Cooler Master Hyper 212                           i9 9900k (x) + Noctua NH-D15 (check)

Gigabyte Z77M-D3H                                                    Gigabyte Aorus Z390 Master (check)

Evga Geforce GTX 970 SC                                          GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2070 SUPER GAMING OC (check)

HyperX FURY Red 16GB 1600MHz DDR3                 G.Skill Ripjaws V 32GB 3200MHz DDR4 (check)

bequiet PURE POWER 600W 80+ bronze                  Corsair RM 650x 80+ gold (check)

Samsung 850 Evo 120 GB + 1TB HDD                       Samsung 970 Evo Plus 500GB (check)

                                                                                     Thermaltake Level 20 MT ARGB (check)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SolarNova said:

Problem is the way it is now, the 'classic' media is very much unbalanced when it comes to political views. As such they hold great sway over the general publics opinion on certain things. Should a online platform allow full freedom of speech and expression, they are quickly demonized by the media as it doesnt fit their narrative. As such the general public will see such platforms as hate filled cesspools of debauchery, becouse thats what the media is telling them it is.

 

The result is the only successful platforms that exist are in fact biased. There is no successful platform that is truly unbiased because all those that are are quickly branded as 'bad' and are targeted for removal.

 

Just think of all the message boards that have been, and are trying be, taken down.

 

A bill to force platforms to be unbiased and censorship free is inevitable, it just has to be made in such a way that even the government cannot make opinionated decision on what violets the rules and what doesn't. It needs to be clearly defined so that regardless of whether the ruling government leans one way or the other, the end result is fair unbiased platforms.

The problem is that this assumes the conservative spin regarding these platforms holds true, and it generally doesn't.  You're complaining about things not fitting a media narrative, but the truth is that there's a countering right-wing narrative trying to portray this as innocent, helpless conservatives being picked on by eeeeeevil liberal elites.

 

From what I've seen, the reality is that there's usually due cause, not just "because they disagree."  Alex Jones spreads fake news and knowingly incites serious threats.  Laura Loomer and Tommy Robinson are virulently islamophobic.  And while not everyone on cesspools like 8chan or Gab is an extremist, the fact is that their anything-goes policy is highly attractive to extremists, and the operators knowingly tolerate those extremists up until the moment one of them inevitably commits a crime.

 

This isn't to say social networks are perfectly fair, but I don't think the situation is as dire as some conservatives claim it is.  And their argument also pretends that these expressions don't have harmful consequences for other users.  Jones- and Loomer-like personas don't exist in a vacuum; they inspire people to harass and threaten other users, impinging on freedom of expression for the community as a whole.

 

With all that said, I think we can safely agree that the Trump regime's draft plan is wrong and must be opposed.  It just replaces one perceived imbalance with another, and one that could be far worse in the long run.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sauron said:

No, the bill says that federal agencies can determine what can and cannot be removed from these platforms. Which is, by definition, censorship. And by the way, social media sites are not immune from lawsuits; you can sue them if they refuse to take down content that is illegal, such as copyrighted material. You can't sue them for banning you at their discretion though, because that's not illegal and it's a perfectly acceptable thing for them to do - it might make them bad platforms but it's definitely not a free speech issue. On the other hand, forcing them to host or promote content they otherwise wouldn't is 100% a form of censorship. Oh, and of course once something like this goes through the sky is the limit - the agencies could just decide that whatever they don't like should be removed; except this time if you refuse to comply you get a jail sentence.

Cite the bill please. Oh wait, you can't because what it actually is is an executive order clarifying how the FCC should enforce section 230, which doesn't give the government any authority to jail anyone at all. Moreover, CNN doesn't even have a copy of the draft order, instead they were read a 'summary' of the draft order which means we don't even know exactly what it says.  As for not being able to sue websites for illegal content, that would be useful to know if that's what I was talking about. However, I was talking about how social media websites are exercising EDITORIAL CONTROL over what appears on their platforms, and more specifically exercising EDITORIAL CONTROL over political viewpoints. That makes them publishers, and means in the normal course of things they would be subject to libel, incitement, and harassment suits. Section 230 shields them from those lawsuits, but was never meant to cover censorship of political viewpoints.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

You hardly have the same reach as any of these large platforms. You're comparing apples to oranges. 

so what? We should take people's rights away if they become too popular? How many followers do I need for my rights to be taken away?

10 hours ago, ARikozuM said:

The gov't would fund a standard allowance to all candidates and then allow for public financing from each citizen with a cap to how much can be given. 

Ok, and the people who already are rich and famous wouldn't even need that allowance. How will anyone be able to learn about a candidate if they can't advertise their existence? Limiting their spending limits their reach. A rich person can travel the country hosting rallies on his own dime, a poor person can't.

36 minutes ago, Stroal said:

Publishers, but don't want to be held liable as publishers. They are avoiding the regulation and responsibility that all publishers face, while also curating content. They want the Platform label, but want Publisher control. 

?????
1. what are publishers?
2. How are they acting as such?
3.What regulations do publishers face?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is falsely named.

 

The intention and effect will be to increase the amount of content online, not to reduce. Censorship is what is currently happening. Massive corporations who control the internet getting to decide what speech is allowed. Censoring what they find politically objectionable or damaging to their profits. Then hiding behind legal protections which were designed around neutral platforms.

 

And dont give me that garbage argument that there is no bias. They locked the Senate majority leader's Twitter account for sharing a video of protesters THREATENING HIM WITH DEATH OUTSIDE HIS HOME, a video that also showed them shouting a hashtag that Twitter promoted by putting it in trending. Yet numerous other accounts commonly share threats they received without being locked. Like Sarah Silverman just did.

 

And that is just the most recent obvious example of just one supposedly neutral platform's intentionally partisan enforcement of intentionally vague rules.

 

Speech has moved almost entirely onto the internet, it cannot be allowed to be controlled by a few mega corporations, the Government must step in.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Chett_Manly said:

 

Speech has moved almost entirely onto the internet, it cannot be allowed to be controlled by a few mega corporations, the Government must step in.

 

 

Funny how this is suddenly important now that a certain party is being adversely affected. Back when it the only ones that would be impacted were the ISP's pocketbook, net neutrality was a Very Bad Thing that must not be allowed.

 


I'm pretty sure my purpose in life is to serve as a warning for others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Cite the bill please. Oh wait, you can't because what it actually is is an executive order clarifying how the FCC should enforce section 230, which doesn't give the government any authority to jail anyone at all.

That's not what the articles say though I admit I don't know if jail is a possible consequence. The point is that this time the government is going to go after you if you don't comply.

10 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Moreover, CNN doesn't even have a copy of the draft order, instead they were read a 'summary' of the draft order which means we don't even know exactly what it says.

So you don't know what it says but you claim to know that CNN is wrong about it?

10 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

However, I was talking about how social media websites are exercising EDITORIAL CONTROL over what appears on their platforms, and more specifically exercising EDITORIAL CONTROL over political viewpoints.

Racism isn't a valid political viewpoint. It's discrimination against a protected class and would be illegal even on a public square.

10 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

That makes them publishers, and means in the normal course of things they would be subject to libel, incitement, and harassment suits.

Except none of those apply to banning aggressively racist or otherwise hateful accounts.

10 minutes ago, ravenshrike said:

Section 230 shields them from those lawsuits, but was never meant to cover censorship of political viewpoints.

That's because 1) it's not censorship and 2) in no situation is it illegal to discriminate over political opinion. Newspapers, despite being PUBLISHERS as you think social media platforms should be, aren't forced to publish content they disagree with. Try showing up at any book publisher's office and DEMAND that they publish your holocaust denial book, let's see how they react.


...is there a question here? 🤔

sudo chmod -R 000 /*

What is scaling and how does it work? Asus PB287Q unboxing! Console alternatives :D Watch Netflix with Kodi on Arch Linux Sharing folders over the internet using SSH Beginner's Guide To LTT (by iamdarkyoshi)

Sauron'stm Product Scores:

Spoiler

Just a list of my personal scores for some products, in no particular order, with brief comments. I just got the idea to do them so they aren't many for now :)

Don't take these as complete reviews or final truths - they are just my personal impressions on products I may or may not have used, summed up in a couple of sentences and a rough score. All scores take into account the unit's price and time of release, heavily so, therefore don't expect absolute performance to be reflected here.

 

-Lenovo Thinkpad X220 - [8/10]

Spoiler

A durable and reliable machine that is relatively lightweight, has all the hardware it needs to never feel sluggish and has a great IPS matte screen. Downsides are mostly due to its age, most notably the screen resolution of 1366x768 and usb 2.0 ports.

 

-Apple Macbook (2015) - [Garbage -/10]

Spoiler

From my perspective, this product has no redeeming factors given its price and the competition. It is underpowered, overpriced, impractical due to its single port and is made redundant even by Apple's own iPad pro line.

 

-OnePlus X - [7/10]

Spoiler

A good phone for the price. It does everything I (and most people) need without being sluggish and has no particularly bad flaws. The lack of recent software updates and relatively barebones feature kit (most notably the lack of 5GHz wifi, biometric sensors and backlight for the capacitive buttons) prevent it from being exceptional.

 

-Microsoft Surface Book 2 - [Garbage - -/10]

Spoiler

Overpriced and rushed, offers nothing notable compared to the competition, doesn't come with an adequate charger despite the premium price. Worse than the Macbook for not even offering the small plus sides of having macOS. Buy a Razer Blade if you want high performance in a (relatively) light package.

 

-Intel Core i7 2600/k - [9/10]

Spoiler

Quite possibly Intel's best product launch ever. It had all the bleeding edge features of the time, it came with a very significant performance improvement over its predecessor and it had a soldered heatspreader, allowing for efficient cooling and great overclocking. Even the "locked" version could be overclocked through the multiplier within (quite reasonable) limits.

 

-Apple iPad Pro - [5/10]

Spoiler

A pretty good product, sunk by its price (plus the extra cost of the physical keyboard and the pencil). Buy it if you don't mind the Apple tax and are looking for a very light office machine with an excellent digitizer. Particularly good for rich students. Bad for cheap tinkerers like myself.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

So you don't know what it says but you claim to know that CNN is wrong about it? 

I know the general target of it yes. I do not know specifics of what it will do but I do know the limits of Section 230.

4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

That's because 1) it's not censorship and 2) in no situation is it illegal to discriminate over political opinion. Newspapers, despite being PUBLISHERS as you think social media platforms should be, aren't forced to publish content they disagree with. Try showing up at any book publisher's office and DEMAND that they publish your holocaust denial book, let's see how they react. 

Correct, publishers are not forced to publish things they do not agree with. They are also subject to libel, incitement, and harassment lawsuits of anything they DO publish.

 

 

 

I ignored the rest of your post because it's complete bullshit as shown by the latest banning of McConnell's account.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Chett_Manly said:

This thread is falsely named.

 

The intention and effect will be to increase the amount of content online, not to reduce. Censorship is what is currently happening. Massive corporations who control the internet getting to decide what speech is allowed. Censoring what they find politically objectionable or damaging to their profits. Then hiding behind legal protections which were designed around neutral platforms.

 

And dont give me that garbage argument that there is no bias. They locked the Senate majority leader's Twitter account for sharing a video of protesters THREATENING HIM WITH DEATH OUTSIDE HIS HOME, a video that also showed them shouting a hashtag that Twitter promoted by putting it in trending. Yet numerous other accounts commonly share threats they received without being locked. Like Sarah Silverman just did.

 

And that is just the most recent obvious example of just one supposedly neutral platform's intentionally partisan enforcement of intentionally vague rules.

 

Speech has moved almost entirely onto the internet, it cannot be allowed to be controlled by a few mega corporations, the Government must step in.

 

 

i know LTT is canadian and probably wont be affect but lets say they are in the US or similar forums in the us should they no longer be allowed to enforce their no political argument rule since its censorship?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×