Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

At least Jon removed his reference to, literally, cleansing the country of Trumpism in the same way the Germans de-nazified after WWII. That was a horrific statement. I'm glad he thought better of it and removed it.

[Ghengis Jon]

Maybe I need to type more slowly to address your reading comprehension problems. You went to osu, right? Wasn't Hooked On Phonics a mandatory class?

What part of "without fettering free speech" did you misunderstand? Where did I advocate censorship? I presented an issue and asked for a potential solution.

JHC, try to keep up.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Amazon booting Parler from its web services is more troubling to me than Apple kicking them off the App Store because the entire site will now cease to function until they find a new host. Apple booting them from the Store wouldn't remove the app from phones that had already downloaded it; just prevents new users. What Amazon has done threatens its survival entirely.

[Dr. Strangelove]

A Capitol Police officer killed himself yesterday.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9131647/Capitol-cop-51-dies-suicide-three-days-MAGA-riots-left-officer-dead.html

[iam416]

Maybe I need to type more slowly to address your reading comprehension problems. You went to osu, right? Wasn't Hooked On Phonics a mandatory class?

What part of "without fettering free speech" did you misunderstand? Where did I advocate censorship? I presented an issue and asked for a potential solution.

JHC, try to keep up.

This might be the stupidest post from you I've ever read.

This is what you said:

Tell me Liney, how would you end this madness without curtailing freedom of speech?

Now, you edited your post to remove your specific call for cleansing the country of Trumpism ala de-nazification. But, I still read this as you advocating "curtailing freedom of speech" -- indeed you have an entire screed after that sentence saying why it's necessary.

If you can't understand how "curtailing freedom of speech" is censorship then I don't know what to say. I know PDJT broke you, but I didn't think he turned you into a flat idiot. I hope that's not the case.

Now, maybe you really are just presenting this as a question. Maybe you really don't care if we "end this madness." Maybe you really don't think that the only way to "end this madness" is through censorship. I dunno. I dunno how fast you're going to keep backpedaling.

What I do know is you're entering shockingly dishonest territory.

[iam416]

Amazon booting Parler from its web services is more troubling to me than Apple kicking them off the App Store because the entire site will now cease to function until they find a new host. Apple booting them from the Store wouldn't remove the app from phones that had already downloaded it; just prevents new users. What Amazon has done threatens its survival entirely.

Well, wehn Apple and Google booted them it was a death blow. Amazon is merely salting the Earth.

I'd get used to this.

[AlabamAlum]

Jon,

Without a framework of freedoms and protections, “truth” is decided upon by those in charge. It’s not like there is a mathematical proof regarding these things. “Fettering” free speech would turn “1984” into a prescient time traveler’s documentary.

In short, I am much less worried about a “cult” believing “lies” than I am giving the party in power the authority to outlaw dissent - even if the dissent is based on untruths - an issue already ancient when Plutarch was still walking about.

[CGVT]

Someone hide Liney’s pearls!

There are 18 million military veterans in the United States. Of that group there are murderers, drug dealers, rapists, addicts, bank robbers, child molesters, and quacko conspiracy theorists. You know... just like every other large demographic. Serving one’s country is an honorable service which should be applauded.

But simply serving in the military does not confer some exalted virtuous status for life that renders the veteran impervious to the consequences of poor decisions and horrible mistakes.

We’ve also learned through many of the police shootings that being unarmed doesn’t necessarily mean the suspect doesn’t pose a threat. Ashli Babbit was 10 feet from the chamber door and there were hundreds of angry people that would have followed her in. My calculus would have been the same as the cop’s: If I let in the first one, I let in 1,000. If I shoot the first one, I let in zero. Sucks to be her but she’s the one who entered herself into the Darwin Games.

This^^^^ 100% this.

As a 30 year vet in what is according to AA in almost a military service ;), I a wholeheartedly agree with this. My status as a Vet does not make me a better person, it get's me a 10% discount a Lowe's and The Waffle House. I am OK with that (it also gets me a sweet deal on health care and the GI Bill sent my daughter to college. I'm OK with that too)

What it doesn't get me is a pass for being a bad person or for doing stupid or horrible things.

I am tired of the "He/She is Veteran and should get special treatment" bullshit.

It seems to me that we fucked up when the Vietnam Vets came home, and now we are overcompensating, kind of like a guy who got caught cheating on his wife and is trying to make up with her.

The cliche' "Thank you for your service", although I appreciate the sentiment and thank the person who says it to me, is tiresome too. Hell, most of us did it because we needed a fucking job.

BTW, to all the Vets on this board, Thank you for your service . ;)

[Ghengis Jon]

Okay, if you insist on playing the dumbass, I'll spell it out for you. "Without curtailing free speech" means to not to curtail free speech. (Am I going too fast for you?) I asked Liney for a solution that does not involve the curtailing of free speech.

My Germany/Iraq/Trump comment was to troll my friend Liney to ensure a response from him. I decided against it.

[AlabamAlum]

Amazon booting Parler from its web services is more troubling to me than Apple kicking them off the App Store because the entire site will now cease to function until they find a new host. Apple booting them from the Store wouldn't remove the app from phones that had already downloaded it; just prevents new users. What Amazon has done threatens its survival entirely.

Wildly troubling. Just wait until major ISPs get on board more than they already have. Because whether we want to admit it or not an ISP is a public utility in this age.

[iam416]

Okay, if you insist on playing the dumbass, I'll spell it out for you. "Without curtailing free speech" means to not to curtail free speech. (Am I going too fast for you?) I asked Liney for a solution that does not involve the curtailing of free speech.

My Germany/Iraq/Trump comment was to troll my friend Liney to ensure a response from him. I decided against it.

That might be as dishonest a post as I've read on this thread.

[Ghengis Jon]

Thank you AA, I appreciate the POV. My personal concern is not that dissent will/could be outlawed, I don't think that will ever happen. I'm concerned about when willingly consumed empirically provable lies reach a point where the Capitol is stormed during a Constitutionally mandated activity aimed at overturning an election. The warning signs were flashing brightly. Is this sort of nonsense what we should accept as an acceptable form of dissent, knowing that lives will likely be lost? A riot every four years by the party that lost, based on clear fabrications?

[Dr. Strangelove]

Well, wehn Apple and Google booted them it was a death blow. Amazon is merely salting the Earth.

I'd get used to this.

In your legal opinion, if Section 230 goes away, what is Apple's legal exposure to Apps it offers through its store? Or Amazon's exposure to sites it hosts on its servers? Do you think their liability has been exaggerated or do you think that they effectively become a "publisher" at that point? Honestly curious if you think maintaining 230 is important at this point or if you want it rewritten.

[Mike]

So where would Net Neutrality play into this situation with deplatforming, etc? I seem to remember arguments from the Left that the big bad corporations will limit or throttle liberal political speech. Did the Rs miss an opportunity here? Because it looks like the shoe is on the other foot now. And I ask in earnest because I’m not up to speed on commerce/trade regulations because I find it painfully boring.

[iam416]

In your legal opinion, if Section 230 goes away, what is Apple's legal exposure to Apps it offers through its store? Or Amazon's exposure to sites it hosts on its servers? Do you think their liability has been exaggerated or do you think that they effectively become a "publisher" at that point? Honestly curious if you think maintaining 230 is important at this point or if you want it rewritten.

The further away you get from the speech at issue, the harder it is to prove liability. I guess an analogy would be to a drug with liability issues. The Pharma company is definitely on the hook. The pharmacy sells the drugs is not.

Amazon is so far away from liability that I can't even really imagine it.

Apple/Google, I guess, are closer. But, still. They're the pharmacy. I think they may run into a problem if they actually start monitoring apps and establishing some sort of protocol where they remove 'dangersous" apps. At that point, if they fail in that regard maybe you can argue they recognized the need to do this and failed and are therefore liabile.

But, by and large, we're not going to have "retailers" policing the products they sell outside of specific facts that they know and are unique to them (spoiled food or failure to remove a known defective product).

But, that said, I can always imagine a lawsuit. So, if 230 goes away, I can imagine suits against deep pockets and some uncertainty until courts rule on liability and establish precedent.