the bill text on FL’s website specifically calls out recordings as NOT harassmen
This appears to be unreliable information. Having downloaded the actual bill text, Ch. 2024-85, I find no reference at all to recording.
The closest thing to a mention is that if your actions could cause emotional distress, then your actions are illegal. We know that being recorded often makes officers feel distress, with perhaps the most notable examples being the unhappiness of officers recorded as they kill unarmed civilians. Even there, however, the term recording is not mentioned.
Link to session law, http://laws.flrules.org/2024/85 (PDF Fla-2024-85)
True, but trying to quantify the ``value added'' by each side is a fool's errand. You need to count something for value and something for usage.
Value is pretty difficult. It is not clear how to quantify the value of the web site's user who carefully chooses interesting stuff to link. That user may in fact be a volunteer.
Then, too, the value must necessarily involve people viewing the material. Counting clicks is a good fill-in for that, counting paraphrases in web site posts is more challenging.
The factors for the Canadian arbitrator to consider do not lend themselves to non-arbitrary results because they provide no measurement tools or methods. The squishy ``value'' to be considered will come down to who gets to choose the arbitrator. Frankly that does not seem a good method for forcible wealth redistribution.
Anyone/everyone who’s invested in Twitter should be made aware of this, and encouraged to get out now before it devalues more than it already has
That might make sense if there were still a market in Twitter/Xitter stock. However, I think it has been removed from the stock exchanges so that now you or an agent have to find someone gullible enough to give you money.
Elon is not a good mark, because he already had to borrow a great lot of money in order to close the purchase and take the company private. And many other investors will prefer to invest in things which have positive cash flows.
Elon will continue to take in tons of money for making things worse
I am not so sure of that. Reports are that some advertisers are cutting back, and real user counts are declining. ALso, it appears that the over all cash flow is such that Xitter cannot pay the money they agreed to pay some folks who left.
I think there were also some landlords who were not being kept current. Also I think he shut down at least one of the server sites.
As a result of such rumors, my guess is that Elon may not so much rake it in, as shovel it out.
Well, yes, uit took way too long for him to be disbarred. The good news is that he appears to have been suspended from practice while the disbarment process crept forward. That should have reduced or eliminated the risk of harm to the public from his practice.
So just to say you’re over 18 anybody can click YES.
Which doesn’t verify you’re over 18 as required by this bill. Dipshit. facepalms
If I ask a kid, Can you verify that you are over 18?'', and the kid says,yes'', then I have verified it. If I were really into security, I could ask him for his birth date.
Going beyond that, please define ``verify'' in some workable manner.
However there has to be a sure way to verify someone is 18 years old
When you find a solution that works on the internet, let me know. We can then set up internet access points at the doors of bars, movie theatres, and dirty-book stores, where the problem of age verification has been intractable for ages.
Your solution is the best one, paraphrased as:
Don’t feed the fucking trolls!
I suggest an upgrade here. If you run with javascript enabled and it works for you, consider not only failing to feed the trolls, but NOT failing to flag them. That might help reduce the visual clutter.
If we wait for the (no longer very) new platform to fix the flag-needs-javascript bug, we should be very careful. If we hold our breaths, we can turn blue.
Anti-monopsony stances and market regulation to rein in large companies aren’t really a Republican thing. Bad guess on your part.
I am not sure that requiring social media sites to give money to large companies like News Corp is really a very effective way to ``rein in large companies''. Normally if I were wanting go rein in some company, I would not go about it by requiring people to give it money.
But Dodds suggested that tech firms could monitor their platforms like they do for illegal content, such as child abuse material
Monitoring for classified material is not quite so easy.
You can readily spot the [#]CSAM material due to the approved hash-tag used when posting it. Until there is a similar manner of identifying secret stuff, I do not really expect the web services to be able to prevent such postings.
Perhaps they can cultivate the use of #UKMI5 and #UKMI6 tags for such stuff, and then sweet-talk target platforms into monitoring those.
My experience is that a level response to a Clare Locke demand letter can back them down
I am not sure how you respond to 77 pages of failure to identify false statements of fact in a libel demand letter. Anything beyond a one-pager asking them to identify each false statement of fact to be corrected would seem to be a waste of paper. Or electrons, if sent by e-mail.
No one was blaming you personally for the fact that ``preview'' an ``flag'' are still broken without javascript, despite the fact that they worked on the old site. How long ago was the switch? And still no fix.
So technically, the police are for white people only.
Right. In fact, that is a fair summary of the creation and history of police forces in the U.S. The goal was to keep what we now call ``minorities'' in line.
The law is bad. It is written to make it easy to abuse Indeed, some abuse is baked in, allowing victim involvement to delay trials while the accused languishes in durance vile. It interferes by its own terms with defense investigation, while leaving the state free to gather or hide evidence and spring surprises.
The hiding of victim information is questionable at best. Suitably published, it can serve as a caution in case the same or similar crooks are out there.
The evils, injuries to crime victims, are already barred by existing law.
There is no provision that Marcy's Law would not apply when the crime did not occur, or the victim was making stuff up. One seeking information would have to litigate blind to prove that no crime occurred before information could be had against the fabulist.
probably too late
maybe I was confused
actually, no
measuring the squish instead
probably too late
not a sure bet
they will remember
slow grind
Well, yes, uit took way too long for him to be disbarred. The good news is that he appears to have been suspended from practice while the disbarment process crept forward. That should have reduced or eliminated the risk of harm to the public from his practice.
age verification is ill defined
Can you verify that you are over 18?'', and the kid says,yes'', then I have verified it. If I were really into security, I could ask him for his birth date. Going beyond that, please define ``verify'' in some workable manner.any suifficiently advanced technology
upgraded solution
perhaps not the most effective plan
not so easy
not clear how this is to be done
plausible deniability
sounds like a
fair summary
extreme example
The fare-collection system for Sunrail (DeLand Jct/Orlando/Poinciana) commuter trains costs more to operate than they collect in fares.
not short enough