Re: It's the 21st century, kids. Have you never read sci-fi?
Couple of facts about moi:
A. Techdirt fanboy, Yes.
B. Love of Google. Absolutely NO.
C. Agree 100% with Mr. Masnick on every single idea he's posted here. Also no.
However, you throwing around such ridiculous claims, WITHOUT proof, is PRECISELY why your comments keep getting flagged by the community.
You're just a trolling douchebag. Jump on Parler, already.
The idea is that these filters are interoperable amongst platforms, which, prima facie, is good for openness and inclusiveness. But, allowing the design choices of filters to be made by a handful of companies turns them into de facto standards bodies. This provides neither inclusivity nor openness.
Just like Facebook and Twitter picking and choosing who is allowed to post opinions online provides neither inclusivity nor openness.
Homeowner must sign a waiver. I'm pretty sure, as TechDirt has pointed out in previous Ring posts, that the police department will keep a careful list of homeowners who "politely decline" to sign a waiver.
AOC can add that to her list of people we should go after...... :)
Gotta agree with most of the crowd here, Koby. Trump is still able to communicate his thoughts via a dozen other media outlets.
In order for him to be censored, then Trump would have to have NO mechanism whatsoever of expressing his opinions.
I think a fairer display of bias, on both sides, is what information each news outlet/social media outlet chooses to cover and which information they choose to deliberately NOT cover.
The argument is valid for everyone from FoxNews/OAN to Facebook/Twitter.
Although I disagree with many of Koby's comments, I think yours comes off as very viseral and emotional, bordering on hateful.
Failure to respond will count as such a retraction.
Failure to respond by what date? If he chooses to wait until May 11th, 2023 @ 07:13:09 AM, and then dump a couple of gigs worth of proof, will you apologize? Will you provide a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site. Now?
Arguing will count as such a retraction.
By definition, if he were to provide said proof, that IS his argument, is it not?
Trolling will count as such a retraction.
I've never met Koby, and I have called him out on his opinions before. My responses here are merely to point out that the five parameters you list that count as a retraction seem to be, as I said, to be a very viseral, emotional reaction to an opinion you disagree with, rather than a definitive argument as to why you believe Koby is incorrect in his assertation.
Misdirection/whataboutism will count as such a retraction.<br /> Any response other than that which has been requested will count as such a retraction.
Those last 2 were just amusing.
If the basic tenet of "Freedom of Speech" is designed to foster discussion between 2 opposing viewpoints, yours, quite honestly, sounds like you're not interested in letting him voice his opinion. And that is exactly what it is.....HIS OPINION.
Mike could exercise his editorial right (as owner of this blog) to simply delete Koby's comment (including the link that allows users to see it if they want.)
On the post: Will Parler Users Treat Its 'Glitch' That Hid Georgia Election Content The Same Way They Treated A Twitter Glitch?
Re: Re: Again Maz don't know 'bout common law terms:
Once again, not true. I've had several of my comments flagged. And you know what? I don't really care :)
I still read TechDirt because of their expertise and reputation, not necessarily their politics.
On the post: Will Parler Users Treat Its 'Glitch' That Hid Georgia Election Content The Same Way They Treated A Twitter Glitch?
Re: Re: Again Maz don't know 'bout common law terms:
Ok, lawyer boi, please provide a link to the exact webpage that shows where Mr. Masnick is doing anything illegal. I would LOVE to see it.
FTFY
On the post: Will Parler Users Treat Its 'Glitch' That Hid Georgia Election Content The Same Way They Treated A Twitter Glitch?
Re: preventing "conservatives" from even being seen...
Uh, actually, I'm a conservative. You see me gleefully replying to your shitposts….
On the post: Will Parler Users Treat Its 'Glitch' That Hid Georgia Election Content The Same Way They Treated A Twitter Glitch?
Re: Re: Twitter censoring and leftist harassment are SAME thing.
Then.....uh....stop posting here, maybe???
I dunno. If you put your hand on a hot stove and get burned, is it really a good idea to put your hand BACK on the same stove?
Think??
On the post: US Military Is Buying Location Data From Data Brokers, Including Data Pulled From US App Users
Re: It's the 21st century, kids. Have you never read sci-fi?
Couple of facts about moi:
A. Techdirt fanboy, Yes.
B. Love of Google. Absolutely NO.
C. Agree 100% with Mr. Masnick on every single idea he's posted here. Also no.
However, you throwing around such ridiculous claims, WITHOUT proof, is PRECISELY why your comments keep getting flagged by the community.
You're just a trolling douchebag. Jump on Parler, already.
On the post: White House Offers To Allow Renaming Confederate Bases... In Exchange For Getting Rid Of Section 230
Re: Well that's such a terrible deal.
I spent 8 years stationed at Fort Bliss, Texas. It was anything but.... :P
On the post: White House Offers To Allow Renaming Confederate Bases... In Exchange For Getting Rid Of Section 230
Re: Dorsey has recently stated that Twitter is NOT a publisher,
It's painfully obvious you have no concept of the difference between Moderation, Discretion and Censorship.
Oh, how convenient, here's a primer:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200521/10454244546/moderation-v-discretion-v-censorship- theyre-not-same.shtml
FTFY
On the post: White House Offers To Allow Renaming Confederate Bases... In Exchange For Getting Rid Of Section 230
Re:
full of spam links and.....shit? It was shit that you were going to type next, right??
On the post: White House Offers To Allow Renaming Confederate Bases... In Exchange For Getting Rid Of Section 230
Insanity check
This whole thing (trading the signing of the NDAA for repealing Section 230) is just 12 types of stupid in an 8 stupid bag.
On the post: Twitch's No Good, Very Bad Time Continues: Part 2
Tim had to post TWICE within 24 hours...
That's it. Twitch just isn't worth the time.
I'm out....
On the post: Upload Filters And The Internet Architecture: What's There To Like?
Re: Dumb it down to a third grade level so nasch can understand.
Duly noted.
On the post: Upload Filters And The Internet Architecture: What's There To Like?
Re: Re: Re:
Wow. Context really eludes you, doesn't it. Your vacuous trolling know no bounds. But hey, you do you. :)
On the post: Upload Filters And The Internet Architecture: What's There To Like?
Re:
I named only 2 platforms, not the entire internet.
FTFY
On the post: Upload Filters And The Internet Architecture: What's There To Like?
Content moderation? Say it ain't so...
The idea is that these filters are interoperable amongst platforms, which, prima facie, is good for openness and inclusiveness. But, allowing the design choices of filters to be made by a handful of companies turns them into de facto standards bodies. This provides neither inclusivity nor openness.Just like Facebook and Twitter picking and choosing who is allowed to post opinions online provides neither inclusivity nor openness.
Got it.
On the post: Mississippi City Trying To Turn Residents' Doorbell Cameras Into Law Enforcement Surveillance Network
Not to mention...
Homeowner must sign a waiver. I'm pretty sure, as TechDirt has pointed out in previous Ring posts, that the police department will keep a careful list of homeowners who "politely decline" to sign a waiver.
AOC can add that to her list of people we should go after...... :)
On the post: To Prevent Free, Frictionless Access To Human Knowledge, Publishers Want Librarians To Be Afraid, Very Afraid
Waiting for the takedown
Patiently waiting on Mike's followup article where Sci-Hub is sued by someone for DCMA takedown action.....
On the post: Cable TV Execs Move Past Denial Stage, Now Fully Expect A 'Cord Cutting' Bloodbath
Bloodbath to come...
Gotta agree with Anonymous Coward on this one. (Although I use a Kindle for books)
Just chilling on the couch, with a big bowl of popcorn, watching the cable companies implode.... LOL
On the post: Nixon Scandal Resulted In A Law To Prevent The Politicization Of Antitrust Cases; Meanwhile Trump Uses His Politicized Antitrust Effort In Campaign Ad
Re: The bias is clear
Gotta agree with most of the crowd here, Koby. Trump is still able to communicate his thoughts via a dozen other media outlets.
In order for him to be censored, then Trump would have to have NO mechanism whatsoever of expressing his opinions.
I think a fairer display of bias, on both sides, is what information each news outlet/social media outlet chooses to cover and which information they choose to deliberately NOT cover.
The argument is valid for everyone from FoxNews/OAN to Facebook/Twitter.
On the post: Nixon Scandal Resulted In A Law To Prevent The Politicization Of Antitrust Cases; Meanwhile Trump Uses His Politicized Antitrust Effort In Campaign Ad
..to Anonymous Coward's response to Koby....
Although I disagree with many of Koby's comments, I think yours comes off as very viseral and emotional, bordering on hateful.
Failure to respond will count as such a retraction.Failure to respond by what date? If he chooses to wait until May 11th, 2023 @ 07:13:09 AM, and then dump a couple of gigs worth of proof, will you apologize? Will you provide a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site. Now?
Arguing will count as such a retraction.By definition, if he were to provide said proof, that IS his argument, is it not?
Trolling will count as such a retraction.I've never met Koby, and I have called him out on his opinions before. My responses here are merely to point out that the five parameters you list that count as a retraction seem to be, as I said, to be a very viseral, emotional reaction to an opinion you disagree with, rather than a definitive argument as to why you believe Koby is incorrect in his assertation.
Misdirection/whataboutism will count as such a retraction.<br /> Any response other than that which has been requested will count as such a retraction.Those last 2 were just amusing.
If the basic tenet of "Freedom of Speech" is designed to foster discussion between 2 opposing viewpoints, yours, quite honestly, sounds like you're not interested in letting him voice his opinion. And that is exactly what it is.....HIS OPINION.
Mike could exercise his editorial right (as owner of this blog) to simply delete Koby's comment (including the link that allows users to see it if they want.)
Order a pizza and chill, brother. :)
On the post: Nixon Scandal Resulted In A Law To Prevent The Politicization Of Antitrust Cases; Meanwhile Trump Uses His Politicized Antitrust Effort In Campaign Ad
I guess Trump thinks that since Nixon is dead, so is the law......
Next >>