It's being horrible that is incendiary not pointing it out.
laws are corrupting if they not enforced. If we create a law that says one thing (regardless of whether you personally think it's a good or a bad law.) and the judge says that law is stupid I'm going to pretend the people did not decide on that law democratically and do what I want instead, even assuming the judge is actually being honest that [s]he thinks the law is wrong and not doing it because of illicit motives [s]he is just choosing their own opinion over what the people decided together.
"Everyone in the USA has the same opportunity"
you made me spit soda out my nose!
"the larger problem is that the ruling makes retweeting images on Twitter much more of a legal risk"
I find it interesting that it's the ruling causing these problems rather than the law when nothing in the article even suggests that the ruling might have interpreted the law incorrectly.
"though I do wonder if it would have come out the same way if it weren't for the high profile nature of Cohen and the president"
This situation really wouldn't exist without that high profile nature.. There wouldn't be any need to muzzle the prisoner without without it either.
Anything that actually helps fix their pretend problem is counterproductive to the goal of diminishing the value and impact of what they see as left leaning (dun dun duuuuuuuun!) companies
There might be fair use arguments, but thats really beside the point. Trump supporters are upset that the video was taken down. The video was taken down because it is required to be so by the DMCA, not due to a decision by Twitter. Whether the claim is a valid copyright or not doesn't really make any difference.
I'm an outsider looking in and believe me I know the U.S. two party system is fundamentally flawed, but people still feel that they can openly dissent to the government on social media in the U.S. without censoring what they say over concerns of being sent to a rehabilitation camp. You aren't there yet.
How many times in history have we tried to enforce the truth only to end up being wrong?
Well I'm not sure thats being honest either, despite being imperfect there are some legal remedies for many types of abuse by companies in the U.S. and the govt has to behave at least well enough to keep up appearances for the elections. The U.S. govt requests specific data and may play fast and loose with the rules but they don't do stuff like make direct long term links to swaths of corporate databases for "dissent" scores with impunity. It would not be correct to say there are no controls in China either, the bigger companies have some economic leverage, but they are not in the same practical situation that the U.S. is in by a long shot.
Nice but
this is about the rules that companies operate under not who runs them.
The difference is that with companies based in china it's not hypothetical abuse, it's hypothetically using their system exactly how it is designed and exactly how they state that it works.
You have no right to be upset if your tiktok data is used by the ccp. It's not abuse on their part, it is absolutely clear in their law that that is what you are signing up for.
I don't really think it's much different for the U.S. hypothetically the government here needs to answer to it's citizens so it might face some blowback and hypothetically the constitution might give companies the ability to deny the government requests for data or at least allow the companies to notify people that the government made such demands, but how much protection it affords is debatable. However, China's legal system basically says chinese companies are currently legally obligated to to give their intelligence agency any data it asks for. I don't see how you can take any comfort whatsoever in a lack of evidence that they are currently accessing data from tiktok. The ccp have access to the data from tiktok if they want it, evidence or no.
What they don't seem to get is that they ask you to wear masks for the exact same reason that they ask you not to set off a bomb in a crowded area.
"there's no evidence that TikTok actually shares that data with the CCP yet"
The thing is the way China is set up the CCP can get access to that data if they decide they want it at any point and without notifying anyone about it. Whether we can prove they are currently using it or not doesn't really make a lot of difference as that could change any time anyway and just depends on the whims of the CCP.
The saddest part of this story is I can't help but think she will get donations
Well they were at least allowed to publish one day later than they otherwise would have been, but you are right they weren't going to actually do it anyway so it doesn't help trump any in this specific case but might next time. How much extra press they got due to the lawsuit vs just because it's one of the many many things trump is trying to muzzle as opposed to because it's Trump's niece publishing a book about how horrible trump is? Up for debate I guess
If you tried to read everything trump tried to muzzle because it was negative to him it would probably take you a lifetime.
I didn't get the point of the article..
I don't think whether measuring exact amounts of internet fragmentation is complicated or not was ever really in question.
"he criticism to the letter wasn't from "cancel culture." It was from people who criticized the letter."
but people criticizing stuff is what they call cancel culture.
Re: Re:
No need for magic it's easy to tell. No badge and uniform? criminal.