Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the wordplay dept
This week, both our top comments on the insightful side are about Elon Musk going to war with the ADL. In first place, it’s Thad with some thoughts about the situation:
There are some legitimate criticisms of the ADL, as Mike points out. I tend to agree that they’re too aggressive, and too quick to equate policy criticisms of Israel with antisemitism.
But about the point you’re suing them for calling you an antisemite, you’ve fucked up. And if you’re blaming Jews for antisemitism, well, I gotta say that kinda proves the ADL’s point.
In second place, it’s an anonymous comment about Musk’s claim that he wants ExTwitter to be the marketplace of ideas:
He doesn’t want it to be the main venue for the marketplace of ideas…
He wants it to be the main venue for the marketplace of his ideas. He wants a site where nobody ever disagrees with him and everybody does nothing but praise him.
He is to X as Trump is to Social. They have their own little bubble they reside in and will disallow anybody on their sites that will even attempt to burst their bubble.
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out with a comment from blakestacey about Common Sense Media’s terrible ideas for internet laws:
Oh good, my fediverse instance won’t be in violation if it conducts quarterly audits with an independent nonprofit or law-enforcement agency and the results of that audit are provided to each member of its board of directors.
God, I’m going to miss the Internet.
Next, it’s an anonymous comment about the accusation that Apple “allows” CSAM on iCloud:
They may as well say…
“Child sexual abuse material is stored on disk drives”.
And Seagate, Western Digital, et al allows it.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is back on the Musk/ADL post, this time replying to a silly comment about supposed government censorship of Twitter:
I’m sorry I can’t hear you over the sound of everyone present laughing at yo dumb ass.
In second place, it’s Stephen T. Stone replying to an even weirder comment about George Carlin’s famous 7 Words being… “still banned by Federal agents since 1972” (?):
Shit. Piss. Fuck. Cunt. Cocksucker. Motherfucker. Tits.
…sorry, what was that you were saying about a ban on seven words?
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with a comment from Thad in response to the accusation that the GOP doesn’t have a platform beyond just grievance politics:
That’s not fair.
Grievance politics and tax cuts for the rich.
Finally, it’s David with a comment in a thread discussing the confusing wording of the idiom about “having your cake and eating it too”:
You only need physical access to the cake to eat it, not possession.
It’s called Habeas Cookies.
That’s all for this week, folks!
Comments on “Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt”
A different way to see it
“Musk’s claim that he wants ExTwitter to be the marketplace of ideas:”
HOW about a place where tons of ideas and concepts can be Thrown around, and the creators have NOW idea that they can be TAKEN and USED and they have no recourse.
If a site like that was created, WITH that concept, no one would post UNLESS they could hold Their own rights to the ideas.
With X’, What are your rights? Has anyone waded threw all the Crap to see if you STILL have rights to your ideas?
Or can he take them, and ERASE what you posted(no proof it was your idea).
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Government Censorship via Twitter
Appeals Court Rules White House Overstepped 1st Amendment on Social Media
So far, the lawsuit against the government censoring on Twitter hasn’t been thrown out, and neither has the preliminary injunction against parts of the government continuing to contact social media sites for further censorship.
The funniest thing in this article is arguing that Yoel Roth deciding not to remove a tweet that was full of anti-Trump expletives at the request of the Trump administration is evidence for the government not engaging in censorship. What needs to be understood is that this is not about the government censoring Twitter. This is about the government using Twitter to censor Americans speaking, using a third-party site that they thought would be immune to violations of the 1st Amendment because it was privately owned, when this third-party site is in agreement with the government. Twitter was as woke as woke could be, and were happy to cooperate with the Biden government but not the Trump government.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
Very well said!
Yet still Mike and his slavish followers will claim that Twitter’s moderation decisions weren’t at all influenced by unconstitutional actions on the part of the U.S. Gov’t! Madness!
Re: Re:
Bro you you managed to wait a whole 18 minutes to reply to yourself.
Re: Re:
Per the “Twitter Files”, Twitter declined to take action more than half the time the government reported content it thought broke Twitter’s rules. Even if—if!—the government reports were somehow unconsitutional, Twitter’s moderation decisions (as evidenced by the “Twitter Files”) weren’t nearly as “influenced” as you want us to believe.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
So when the government wanted to silence speech, they only succeeded half the time. And we’re supposed to consider that a positive outcome? You really are an idiot, aren’t you?
Re: Re: Re:2
Why do you hate constitutionally-protected free speech, bro?
Re: Re: Re:2
So social media companies aren’t allowed at all to come to the same assessment as the government when it comes to what should be moderated?
Re: Re: Re:3
If anything the standard they are proposing would create serious first amendment problems as it would allow the government to essentially veto or protect any content they wanted simply by commenting upon it, since after having done so the platform couldn’t moderate the content in question or allow it to be posted in the first place lest they risk being hauled into court for ‘violating the first amendment.’
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
It is the actions of the government that violate the 1st Amendment, when they make requests of platforms to silence certain viewpoints. The platforms can do whatever they want. The injunction that the court just upheld isn’t against X censoring, it is against the government contacting sovial media platforms to ask them to censor.
Re: Re: Re:5
And what viewpoints would those have been? covid is no worse than the flue, Internecine cures covid an other such bad medical advice that could get people killed?
Re: Re: Re:6
For Hyman, it’s “child porn should be freely available on Twitter if Elon Musk thinks that’s okay”.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:7
It doesn’t matter what the viewpoints are; the government isn’t allowed to censor any of them, even by asking nicely.
Re: Re: Re:8
‘The government attempting to reduce the spread and availability of CSAM is a bad thing that they shouldn’t be allowed to do’ is certainly one hell of a hill to plant your flag on, but you do you you abhorrent person.
Re: Re: Re:8
Harming children is not protected speech, Hyman.
CSAM material is just that: harming children. That is why it’s not protected under 1A.
Of course, considering where you stand, it’s no surprise.
Re: Re: Re:8
I rest my case, Your Honor.
Re: Re: Re:5
Well, Hyman.
You also seem to hate the courts.
I’m NOT sorry not all the judges are bribable like Clarance Thomas…
Re: Re: Re:2
I don’t respond to otherwording.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
How nice for you. If you extended that to not responding at all, we would all be so much better off.
Re: Re: Re:4
What “we” is this?. The fantasy adult integrity league?
Re:
Where is the law that says a site has to follow the politics of the party in power? Also, why can you not accept that many people do not want to listen to you, and are moderation should be driven by what the users want. I almost said is moderated, but Musk seems to be doing a good job of driving users to other sites by moderating closer to the moderation that you want.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
The violation of the 1st Amendment is in the action of the government, not in what Twitter decided to do. When the government asks that speech be silenced, that is the violation, regardless of whether the request is honored.
Re: Re: Re:
Hey, yo-yo,
Let me quote you directly:
See that bold part? That was you, not me (nor anyone else). Even in your own sub-conscience, you know for a fact that the federal government is not demanding anything (unlike several of the states just itching to overturn 1A), and especially not under duress or threat of any sort. It seems as if you’re trying to force the rest of us to accept your re-definition of the word “ask” to mean the same as “demand”, and I hate to break it you, but that’s just not in the cards.
So the $64,000 question is: why hasn’t your mouth stopped spewing diarrhea long enough for your constipated brain to regain equilibrium?
Re: Re: Re:2
Can’t believe you missed it;
The OP also said “regardless of whether the request is honored.” He said “request”, not “demand”.
Re: Re: Re:3
Oh shit. That’s what I get for catching one error and then crowing from the rooftops…. then I go and ignore other errors that should’ve been equally obvious.
Gotta put that Evelyn Wood book back on the shelf, and start reading for comprehension.
Re: Re: Re:
The exercise of the 1st amendment*
Re: Re: Re:
Did the same government send the same requests to GAB, Parler, Truth, Rumble? If not they were not even indirectly attempting censorship by asking Twitter if a post breached its moderation policy.
Also, why do you consider one platforms actions censorship, when you have other platforms that would carry your speech?
Re:
Your entire comment is BS. Here’s why:
Anyway, I doubt this’ll change your mind, since you like being uneducated on how the first amendment works. But at least I tried, though I’m not the first.
Re: Re: You are missing the forest for the trees
Old Twitter lived from appealing to its user base, not from appealing to the government. So there is little surprise that it would have been less responsive to requests in the spirit of fascist doctrine putting state interests before that of individuals, while it is the mark of liberal doctrine to let state interests follow that of individuals.
So I consider it entirely plausible that the responsiveness to requests from the Biden administration might have been better than to those from the Trump administration, simply because of the aim of the requests rather than because of who was issuing them.
Of course, even then I doubt that the differences were earthshaking since all the small wheels of law enforcement gruntwork don’t turn on a dime: the bulk of employees are not politically appointed even if politically directed.
Re: Re: Re:
Precisely what I was getting at. Like you I wouldn’t be surprised if Twitter was more willing to acquiesce to the Biden Administration than to the Trump Administration, but them doing so is (1) entirely voluntary and (2) so insignificant compared to the overall number of requests that they received that it wouldn’t matter all that much.
Re: Re: Re:2
Not sure if the “missing the forest for the trees” was directed at me or towards the original commenter I was replying to, but if it was indeed at me I’m not really sure how. My note that the original assertion was purely anecdotal is still true. But even if it wasn’t true and it did happen, Twitter was just appealing to it’s user base, which just so happened to include people who work in government — it doesn’t mean that the government sent them an order demanding that Twitter ban/deboost users/delete/hide posts (and no such order exists).
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
And in fact, Twitter brought the receipts, via the so-called Twitter Files.
What they showed was a stack of invoices, stamped paid, to the FBI (and other spy agencies) for services rendered. That service? Simple – the agency requests specific information on (or about) a specific account. Nothing more than that. I’d hazard a guess that such requests are usually on the up-and-up, not some fishing expedition, but what do I know, eh?
Even the government must pay private companies for services rendered, they can’t just waltz in and demand that it be done for free…. that’d be a “taking”, and the Constitution has a few words to say about that (the ‘takings’ clause). Go look it up for yourself, I’m tired of doing your homework for you!
Re: Re: Re:4
…was that Matt Tiabbi is an illiterate hack for whom three letters is too much for him to handle at once, the way he confused CIS (not the government) with CISA and hallucinated an entire fake conspiracy around his politically-motivated error.
Re: Re: Re:5
i’m still surprised he didn’t think the CIS was Russia.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist
The Hollywood Blacklist of Communists and sympathizers wasn’t enforced by law either, only by private third parties who had the 1st Amendment right to do so if they wished. When the government wants certain people to be silenced and has a compliant private industry to enforce that silencing, the government is violating the 1st Amendment.
Re: Re: Re:
Are you shitting me? Jesus H. Christ on a jumped-up Pogo stick!
As above (ask = demand), you’re now trying to conflate ‘compliance’ with ‘demand’. And also as above, this ain’t in the cards either.
Just because one or more private companies wish to fall all over themselves in supplication to a given political party in power, that doesn’t mean that there was any threat of retribution, under color of law, if they didn’t “comply”.
If I was one of your High School Civics class teachers, right about now I’d shoot myself out of embarrassment over your insidious belief that ignorance is bliss. It’s not, and you really need to learn that lesson.
Next time, try harder to think before opening your mouth, you might not get so much heat in our rebuttals.
Re: Re: Re:2
In the case of Twitter, the “Twitter Files” proved there was no threat of retribution because the government explicitly told Twitter it could take any action—including no action at all—that Twitter wanted in re: content the government believed violated Twitter’s TOS.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
The government asking a compliant, similar- thinking third party to censor speech is a violation of the 1st Amendment. At least plausibly enough that an appeals court is leaving a preliminary injunction in place forbidding the government from doing that.
As always, you hate the 1st Amendment because you don’t want people to have freedom of speech, religion, or association, or the ability to petition the government, when people use those freedoms to counter the viewpoints you would impose on them.
Re: Re: Re:4
…says Hyman Rosen, who defended the act of child rape as a “viewpoint” to be debated.
Re: Re: Re:4
…somethihg that only happened in the deranged halluc nations of addicts, not in the real world.
Re: Re: Re:4
Hyman.
It’s one thing if you believe the government asking if certain posts violate their guidelines is a waste of taxpayer money.
It’s another if there’s a threat attached to that request to check.
GET THE FUCK OUT NEFORE I DO SOMETHING DRASTIC, NAZI PEDOPHILE.
Re: Re: Re:5
Dude, I don’t like Hyman either, and I still think you need to stop playing Internet Badass.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:6
Eh, double velour futon lanai on him. He makes for a nice illustration of what happens when a site dies not moderate for decorum.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:7
Futanari anal vore will be normalized as the natural outcome of progressive evolution, Hywoman.
Your era of abusing penis privileges are over, as will be the case for each and every one of you male scum who won’t pick up a pride flag and march.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:6
No, I think this Internet badass has a point here. He’s said multiple times, cishet male scum from the US and China is precisely why people where we live can’t openly kiss people of the same gender on the mouth in front of children like we should be entitled to. At some point we won’t be able to take it anymore. Change will happen, and the more people march in the name of the alphabet mafia as Demi Lovato put it, the better.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:5
Oh gawd you make me so hard! Humiliate that cishet slut! Do it! I’m so close!
Re: Re: Re:6
Touched a nerve, Hyman?
We know you’re usung multiple personas for harassment.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:7
As long as Hywoman keeps getting the blame I care very little for what you think of me, save for working towards a world where wolf smut fanfic writers can express love with the canids they worship in the name of FSM.
Re: Re: Re:4
This all devolves to the definition of ‘compliant’, and to the applicability of that word to the whole business of alleged acts of censorship via governments “requests”. Sadly for the OP that started all of this, the English language is more resilient than a few hotheads in a forum trying muster up the requisite number of people to overturn Merriam-Webster et al.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:5
Nope, the definition doesn’t matter at all. It’s the government’s attempt to silence viewpoints that’s the 1st Amendment violation, regardless if the sites they’re contacting are eager to accommodate or reluctant, and regardless if the government is asking nicely or threatening. The government is not allowed to silence viewpoints, and asking private third parties to do it for them dies not grant them extra permission.
Re: Re: Re:6
Funny how the courts doesn’t agree with you.
Re: Re: Re:7
Not only ‘funny’ but thankfully the courts don’t agree with him.
Hey, hothead. Yeah, you the intellectual equivalent of a raw carrot – I asked you once before, when are you gonna take that stick out of your ass and stop whining like a baby? You’re starting to give us other ACs here a bad reputation.
Re: Re: Re:6
As the courts have ruled, any such attempts have to be accompanied by some form of coercion. The government telling Twitter “hey, this content may violate your TOS, do something about it or don’t, your call” isn’t coercive.
Re: Re: Re:7
Guys… rather than continuing to discuss this here, you could discuss it on the post about the ruling that has quotes, and background, and nuance, etc. etc. etc…
https://www.techdirt.com/2023/09/11/5th-circuit-cleans-up-district-courts-silly-jawboning-ruling-about-the-biden-admin-trims-it-down-to-more-accurately-reflect-the-1st-amendment/
Re: Re: Re:8
I just want to reply here that I was wrong about the government being allowed to try to silence speech non-coercively; at least according to this decision, the government is allowed to do that and it is not a 1st Amendment violation.
Re: Re: Re:8
Aww, Mike, there you go again, moderating a discussion on your own private platform. Jeez, we’re all just aghast here….
j/k
Re:
…hallucinated nobody mentally competent, ever.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
Hey straight white trash.
Gavin Newsom’s gonna let us pick our own gender and pronouns. Makes your blood boil doesn’t it?
Go die in a fire with your Andrew Tate buddies. You fucked up Twitter for us, now we’re gonna fuck you! Not in the sexy cock and ball torture FurAffinity way, I mean in the Spit on Your Grave kind of way.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
Keep hiding our comments, you cishet scum. This will all be remembered as homophobia. Your kind is on the cusp of a dying gasp and it’s going to be funny as fuck to watch.
Re: Re: Re:
As Toom1275 would have it: “Please return your seat tray to its upright and locked position. Your hallucination will be ending shortly.”
Re: Re: Re:
The funny thing is you honestly believe somewhere is going to agree with you someday Herman. Indeed of mocking you like the simp you are.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
Oh I don’t need people to agree with Hyman, I just need people to think everything is his fault.
Stephen Stone’s already there. We’ve got people threatening to do something drastic because Hyman breathes oxygen from the same planet as we do. This is progressive pushback against chauvinism and I’m all for it.
Re: Re: Re:3
Keep my name out of your mouth and stop shoving your words down my throat.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:4
I’m born this way, and I’m on the right track baby.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:5
You can keep trying to censor us, Hyman. It won’t work. The US and China will pay for trying to establish heteronormativity and straight white scum like you will be first on the chopping block when all’s said and done.
Re: Re:
Hey Herman. Andrew Tate is about four news cycles old. Hey new material bro.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
Eh, give Tate time, he’s going to have a news cycle of true love up his ass where he’s going. And about damn fucking time. Every specimen of male white scum needs to have their heads and sexuality reexamined until they’re no longer a threat to society.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
Well, to be fair…
In order re-examine a case of rectal-cranial inversion, one must first remove the patient’s head from his ass. And that right there instills the desired cure, so no need for any further examination.
But beyond that, beware of what you ask for…. Your closest friends may not think of you as “white male scum”, but all it takes is one woman to make the accusation, and you become well acquainted with the term “in deep kimchee”.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
Revenge for the Roe v Wade repeal will happen, and finally for once, men will learn to recognize that their actions have severe consequences.
Musk the effing nutcase!
https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/elon-musk-s-11th-child-named-techno-mechanicus-20230911-p5e3kl.html
Re:
wtaflmao
Re: Re:
The one upside of Musk being the useless sperm donor that he is is that he’s going to drive Grimes back to another woman instead of accepting his overvalued baby batter, and the kid is going to hate him so much that they’ll pick their own pronouns before they hit puberty.