It has an annual revenue of 1 billion. That's peanuts versus Google, Microsoft or Amazon, but still a pretty important company. Also, TIL Atlassian is Australian.
Twitter is an asynchronous messaging website. How can it implement end-to-end encryption, when messages are stored in servers until the recepient opens the browser and logs in?
Dear Mike, podcasts are called so because of the iPod, whose integration with iTunes popularized the format. So your rant is 15 years late.
Oh America, the land where obscenity is not protected as free speech, but calling to violence is protected as free speech except if it's imminent.
Excuse my lack of understanding. Are you sure that Section 230 protects website users? I thought that it protected websites from users, not viceversa.
YouTube is not the only video website, but it does have a huge market share.
Requiring "viewpoint-neutral" moderation is restricting the freedom of speech.
I'm sure that if any other president wrote tweets glorifying violence or misinforming, Twitter would fact check them too.
Shareholders get representation at the company's board. They can certainly decide what the company does or doesn't.
No need to buy journalists, they do it at no extra charge.
Journalism has become entertainment. The term "newsworthy" has lost any meaning.
We saw the case where Google was told by France and Canadato censor and not censor search results simultaneously. Likewise, we wouldnt like Russia or Saudi Arabia to tell companies to censor gay parades or political dissenters worldwide.
The internet is worldwide, but laws are territorial. International treaties could be an option, but as already said, authoritarian countries are well represented in the United Nations. On the other hand, multistakeholder organizations usually have an overrepresentation of corporations.
The European Union's GDPR has good points and bad points. It certainly has the power of law. It certainly protects privacy, even of politicians who should be transparent.
I agree with Mike that deleting Trump's tweets would be a tertible idea, and that fighting speech with speech was an excellent decision by Twitter.
Now, I disagree with nearly everything that Trump says. However, I do think that mail voting isn't fail safe. There's no way to guaranteethat a mail vote was sent by the person who is supposed to, just like with internet voting.
I disagree with the article's opinion. The point isn't confusion between wine and beer, but between the manufacturers of wine and beer.
Companies like Coca-Cola, Pepsi, AB InBev, Heineken, Diageo, Pernod-Ricard, Suntory and Asahi. They produce a wide range of beverages.
Therefore if a customer sees Wine Drop and Beer Drop, or Wildcat Beer and Wildcat Vodka, they may assume that both products are from the same company.
These carriage conflicts and fees happen to major local stations and sports channels for a very clear reason: those channels are the most desired and most expensive ones.
Of course companies shouldn't charge fees for channels they don't offer. Of course the advertised cost should include all fees.
Yet, its good that companies show the cost of specific channels (especially the expensive ones), as this case shows.
In the good old days, organizations freely distributed propaganda to reach the masses.
Now they only let you see propaganda if you sign up and pay a subscription.
I agree that mainstream media is also to blame.
These conglomerates search quick profit from clickbait headlines. They spread the disinformation that comes from the far right, because it gets larger audiences that moderate, reasonable pieces.
In fact, most endings of Choose Your Own Adventure books result in the death of the main character. That was the point of the adventures.
I'm very interested in the concept of information fiduciary. Can you explain it more thoroughly?
Jacob Blake while unarmed tried to get into his car, and the police shot him 7 times on his back.
Kyle Rittenhouse shot multiple people, and the police did not arrest him.
Calling American cops racist is an understatement.