endomorphosis 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (459) comment rss

  • On the post: No, The FBI Is NOT ‘Paying Twitter To Censor’

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2022 @ 02:35pm

    That's because the FBI does not file lawsuits, the FBI investigates, and then provides the information to agencies who do sue, such as the FTC. That is the nature of the carrot and the stick, and you will notice that it occurred shortly after Musk made his offer to buy twitter. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2022/05/ftc-charges-twitter-deceptively-using-account-security-data-sell-targeted-ads

  • On the post: No, The FBI Is NOT ‘Paying Twitter To Censor’

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2022 @ 02:22pm

    Except that according to the precedent handed down in Bantam Books V. Sullivan, Government censorship is exactly what happened. The government has been sending threats via congress (which is immune under the debate clause) to tech companies that they will be punished if they do not remove speech, and then the government sends FBI agents to tell them what speech that they should remove, and the government can and does "discretionary" powers within agencies to punish / reward companies quid pro quo. To pretend otherwise is either completely naïve as to how the government operates, or to be so disingenuous as to mislead your readers. This is literally one of the allegations behind the Amazon web services lawsuit about the JEDI program contract, that Trump was punishing Amazon for its political alignment, do you pretend that its only Trump that does so? "Their conduct as disclosed by this record shows plainly that they went for beyond advising the distributors of their legal rights and liabilities. Their operation was in fact a scheme of state censorship effectuated by extra-legal sanctions; they acted as an agency not to advise but to suppress." Bantam Books V. Sullivan 372 U.S. 58, 72

  • On the post: No, The FBI Is NOT ‘Paying Twitter To Censor’

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2022 @ 02:12pm

    The Commission's notices, phrased virtually as orders, reasonably understood to be such by the distributor, invariably followed up by police visitations, in fact stopped the circulation of the listed publications ex proprio vigore. It would be naive to credit the State's assertion that these blacklists are in the nature of mere legal advice when they plainly serve as instruments of regulation independent of the laws against obscenity. Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 69(1963) "Their conduct as disclosed by this record shows plainly that they went for beyond advising the distributors of their legal rights and liabilities. Their operation was in fact a scheme of state censorship effectuated by extra-legal sanctions; they acted as an agency not to advise but to suppress." Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan, 372 U.S. 58, 72 (1963) Sounds alot like Twitter.

  • On the post: No, The FBI Is NOT ‘Paying Twitter To Censor’

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 21 Dec, 2022 @ 09:58am

    ITS NOT CENSORSHIP!

    Cries the shill. THERE IS NO COERCION Cries the shill. 'Fix Your Companies. Or Congress Will.' https://dailycaller.com/2022/12/18/adam-schiff-twitter-elon-musk-cnn/ https://greenwald.substack.com/p/congress-escalates-pressure-on-tech https://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Feinstein-to-Facebook-Fix-it-before-the-12800274.php

  • On the post: Hello! You’ve Been Referred Here Because You’re Wrong About Twitter And Hunter Biden’s Laptop

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2022 @ 07:35am

    Mike Shills Against Freedom

    Mike says loudly: THERE IS NOTHING NEFARIOUS HERE Then goes on a several page screed explaining: Why it it totally ok for twitter, to decide what ideas people are allowed to see, while claiming to be the "free speech wing". Why its totally OK for them to make up that the materials were somehow "hacked" (but that claim didn't come from the government) Why its okay to discuss in the company, trying to prevent someone from becoming president, because its not a campaign donation. Remember: “And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed—if all records told the same tale—then the lie passed into history and became truth. ‘Who controls the past’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.”

  • On the post: Twitter’s Former Head Of Trust & Safety Explains Why, For All His Billions, Elon Musk Can’t Magically Decide How Twitter Will Work

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 22 Nov, 2022 @ 04:22am

    Every Mike Masnick Bootlicking Spectacular

    Every articles is about how there will be a parade of horrables, if we allow everyone to have their voice, and he proposes that we give people the power deafen them. Yet, every conversation going back the Gutenberg has shown that this claim of danger is hyperbolic and self serving, as the priesthood gets its power from declaring truth.

  • On the post: It’s Not The Decision, But The Process: Musk & The Trump Decision

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 22 Nov, 2022 @ 04:20am

    Every Mike Masnick bootlicking Spectacular

    Every articles is about how there will be a parade of horrables, if we allow everyone to have their voice, and he proposes that we give people the power deafen them. Yet, every conversation going back the Gutenberg has shown that this claim of danger is hyperbolic and self serving, as the priesthood gets its power from declaring truth.

  • On the post: Federal Court Blocks Florida’s ‘Stop WOKE’ Act, Calls It ‘Positively Dystopian’

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 22 Nov, 2022 @ 04:05am

    Just watch.

    This is a road the left may not want to travel down, because if banning allegedly racist speech at the workplace is unconstitutional under the First Amendment, then so is all of the hostile workplace claims that have been submitted.

  • On the post: Fact Check: Facebook’s Policy That Its Fact Checkers Can No Longer Check Trump Is Very, Very Bad

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 18 Nov, 2022 @ 04:44am

    Campaign Finance

    I believe that the central issue, may very well be that it could be portrayed as "a thing of value" which would be subject to campaign finance disclosures, which is something that Facebook wants to avoid. see e.g. the Washington State penalty levied against Facebook for not disclosing political advertisements.

  • On the post: Bullshit Reporting: The Intercept’s Story About Government Policing Disinfo Is Absolute Garbage

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 04 Nov, 2022 @ 04:28am

    facts

    Diane Feinstein said about "Russian" influence on social media "You’ve created these platforms and now they are being misused, and you have to be the ones to do something about it, or we will." https://youtu.be/J_QJLHxSAA8?t=90 I wonder how the government will "hold companies accountable", perhaps they will direct the treasury department or regulatory agencies to do so. https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2022/11/01/musk-twitter-treasury-department-review/

  • On the post: Bullshit Reporting: The Intercept’s Story About Government Policing Disinfo Is Absolute Garbage

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 03 Nov, 2022 @ 06:29am

    You're ruining their credibility

    With strawman arguments like the quote: “we need a media infrastructure that is held accountable.” is somehow taken out of context. by claiming it was about "educating the public", but not specifying how they are going to be held accountable for failing their responsibility for educating the public. https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/hold+accountable Then you claim that nothing in there talks about the Hunter Biden laptop, Yet the CEO of Facebook even claimed that he was asked by the FBI to censor the Hunter Biden laptop story on Joe Rogan. You know, after fakebook was "held accountable" for the 2016 election in the form of billions of dollars of fines, for allowing Cambridge Analytica to exercise their first amendment rights, under the theory that people agreeing share their friends list to Cambridge Analytica constituted a "violation of privacy" of the persons spoken about by their friend. Again, you shill so hard for corporate and government interests, it makes me wonder if your views are genuine or for sale.

  • On the post: 5th Circuit Rewrites A Century Of 1st Amendment Law To Argue Internet Companies Have No Right To Moderate

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 01:42am

    Public accomidations

    The first amendment right to "free association" didn't protect the rights of restaurants to kick out national socialists, when they were sued under the Unruh Civil Rights act, nor did it protect the rights of other public accommodations to discriminate either on the basis of race or in the instance of Pruneyard Shopping on the basis of viewpoint.

  • On the post: 5th Circuit Rewrites A Century Of 1st Amendment Law To Argue Internet Companies Have No Right To Moderate

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 16 Sep, 2022 @ 11:15pm

    Mike Buries the Lede again

    Some how the Supreme Court in Pruneyard Shopping allowed the states to deny the right of malls from censoring speech, because the first amendment doesn't protect speech that doesn't belong to the mall, and nobody is going to associate the mall itself with the speakers in it, yet he somehow thinks that this appellate court judge is wrong for the same reasons. Somehow he thinks that it is twitter's own free speech rights to censor people, yet what section 230 does is to immunize platforms because it clearly isn't twitters speech. Well, either its twitters speech and they are responsible for the speech on their platform, or it isn't their speech and they are not responsible for the speech on their platform, you don't get the best of both worlds. Mike is a corporate shill.

  • On the post: Project Veritas Not Only Loses Its Vexatious SLAPP Suit Against Stanford, It Has To Pay The University’s Legal Fees

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 09 Aug, 2022 @ 03:44am

    Mike Buries the Lede again

    He claims that Project Veritas is anti-free speech, but omits their central claims in the lawsuit. "Project Veritas contends that EIP silences conservative voices by labeling suggestions of voter fraud or improper voting activity as disinformation and by then contacting social media companies to demand that they remove the disinformation." "the Blog Post stated that the Video Report “made several falsifiable claims that have either been debunked by subsequent reporting or are without any factual support.” Isabella Garcia-Camargo, Alex Stamos, & Elena Cryst, et al., Project Veritas #BallotHarvesting Amplification, Election Integrity P'ship (Sept. 29, 2020)," It sounds like they are absolutely standing up for free speech, and trying to prevent the "ministry of truth" from defaming them, and having their posts deleted from social media.

  • On the post: The 5th Circuit Reinstates Texas’ Obviously Unconstitutional Social Media Law Effective Immediately

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 13 May, 2022 @ 07:39am

    cope and seethe

    your just mad because social media companies are going to be treated like common carriers

  • On the post: Elon Musk’s Twitter Business Model Idea: Ignore Free Speech Rights And Try To The Charge Media To Quote Tweets

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 03 May, 2022 @ 08:17am

    Yet More Seething

    I love how this site which claims to love "Free Speech" all of a sudden is seething that Elon Musk wants to allow "hate speech" on twitter. You are a bunch of sensitive cucks, which would allow corporations to stifle speech, just because they aren't the government. Also, I would like to point out that what separates humans from animals, among other things, is that humans have the capacity to hate, meaning that it must have served an important evolutionary purpose. That is because hate is a powerful motivator, and without for example the hate of injustice, there would be no justice.

  • On the post: Klobuchar, Cotton Competition Bill Latest To Pretend 'Big Tech' Is The Only Industry With Problems

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 10 Nov, 2021 @ 02:37pm

    Re: Re: But They're Doing It Too!

    Does the First Amendment allow a private company such as, your telephone company, or lets say the Federal Express, to censor based on content, even if the government shut down the USPS. Can every ISP, telephone company, television company, mail company, decide to "deplatform" former president trump, because they are private companies, to create a communication black hole around any person they disagree with? Or is it that the mail, like the telephone, like the ISP, like the social media companies, not actually in the business of creating content but carrying other peoples content, so therefore they must all behave as common carriers and therefore should be immune from the liability of what they carry? The companies shouldn't have it both ways, they cant have "first amendment" protections because they aren't a publisher, just as the telephone company and Fed Ex is not a publisher. If they DO have "first amendment" right as a publisher, then why are we giving them immunity, when they choose what to "publish".

  • On the post: Klobuchar, Cotton Competition Bill Latest To Pretend 'Big Tech' Is The Only Industry With Problems

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 10 Nov, 2021 @ 02:23pm

    Re: Re: But They're Doing It Too!

    Nor does this one. You alt-right trolls keep arguing that a private corporation is government.
    Its actually quite simple, if the companies do not please the government, the government can fuck the companies, so therefore the companies do the governments bidding, how hard is this to figure out? Do you think that WeChat is censoring its users as a private company, or on the behalf of the government, and why are the American tech companies any different? Furthermore what stops the government from selling the post office, and now allegedly you don't have a "right" anymore to use the mail to send your "racist" content to willing recipients. How is the mail whether USPS or fedex any different than the telephone or the internet, other than the fact that the data is on a physical medium? Finally, what is your opinion about the big tech companies banning discussion of the Hunter Biden laptop before the election, and emails demonstrating that Hunter Biden was arranging kickback schemes with foreign companies? Is that yet another example of private companies removing "racist" content? Freedom of speech is a principal in addition to a constitutional right, our idea of self government relies on the ability of people, to receive information based upon which they can make decisions about the world, including information about what different countries and "races" do, such as use gain of function research of coronaviruses ... a theory which was also called "racist" before it was proven true.

  • On the post: A Copyright First: Bogus Copyright Takedown Leads To Australian Court Awarding $150k Damages

    endomorphosis ( profile ), 06 Apr, 2012 @ 06:12pm

    Re:

    So in other words he paid a deposit for the work, but still owes the remainder on the balance. It was probably something that was done on a fixed price contract on which there was "project creep", He probably took what she had mostly or completely finished, and refused to pay for the work that she did in the process. I have had some clients do stuff like this, both intentionally and neglectfully through ineptitude, (by a client who didn't understand you cant just magically convert profile pictures 4:3 to 3:4 and have it look right).