LostInLoDOS 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (4895) comment rss

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2022 @ 12:05pm

    You have a valid point on this one, but thinking of the largest monopoly in automotive: Chrysler/Fiat, you can see how it falls flat. They own and can produce Chrysler, dodge, Plymouth, jeep, ram, Eagle, fiat, Alfa Romeo, American Motors, Graham-GB, DeSoto, Fargo, imperial, valiant, Rootes, Maxwell, Chalmers, Brush, Dayton, Alden, Sampson, Hacket, Lorraine, Gray, Objective, Holding, Singer, Hudson, Nash, AeroCar, AMG and AMC, Kaiser, Essex, Page, Rambler, Russel, Willys… And that’s not including long term, still active, first option rights to former brands like Lamborghini, Mercedes, and Peugeot. And yet, there is healthy competition. With other monopolies. A monopoly is not necessarily bad in/of itself. But the attempt to break a long time monopoly never works out. Look at the misguided Bell breakup. You can’t force a company to compete with itself. Many of the intentions, such as interchangeable devices, could have been done through solo regulation. Instead the monopoly busting gave us 20 years of increasing prices, the mega scandal with MCI, poorer quality, and the now entrenched methodology of never upgrading the back end. Then there’s the aspect of service. What would you break up Facebook or Twitter into? Given both are entirely different services competing with each other and others. Marketing bill aside: twitter is a text messenger. A rather archaic one of that, with length limits. Facebook is yet another blog service. Twitter has FAR less users than Apple and Google. …Or even Samsung! Facebook isn’t even close to the wordpress user count. Neither provide much in the way of “other” services. What would you actually force them to divest that would change anything?

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2022 @ 11:35am

    The Internet was and is a government-designated public forum.
    You need to step back a few decades to understand how that’s irrelevant to censorship. Before the internet there was dial up services. The service, such as CIS, or AOL, was the data. Same with any BBS like TechPro or FSM The carrier was the phone line. There’s an extra member in the internet. It doesn’t change how it works, it ADDS another layer The carrier is the coaxial or fibre line, whoever may own it. The provider is the company that directs the data from one carrier to another. The service is the private company, eg face book or twitter.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 04:22pm

    I understand that. And my attack is meant to target the expansion of the practice that is (almost) always nudged into practice. It is not a direct attack on you, even if it comes across that way at times.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 04:15pm

    https://www.techdirt.com/2022/09/16/5th-circuit-rewrites-a-century-of-1st-amendment-law-to-argue-internet-companies-have-no-right-to-moderate/#comment-2424539 Censorship, that is, the deletion of parts of media, the bleeping of songs, the cutting and editing of games —to such an extent some games become impassable— is something that has been a thorn in my consumption choices for as long as I’ve been alive. It’s something that quickly makes my blood boil. I admit my arguments may, push into the world of extreme for point of argument at times. So I’m sorry. I can become an arse when it is a topic I feel passionate about.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 03:49pm

    You make a great point! Clearly I have some very strong base opinions having grown up in the “censorship” era: the 70s film, 80s music, 90s games. I’ve seen how aggressively many who want actual censorship fight to wiggle in and make more extensive lockdowns. I apologise, especially to STS, to whom I may be becoming increasingly aggressive. You make a great point! Clearly I have some very strong base opinions having grown up in the “censorship” era: the 70s film, 80s music, 90s games. I’ve seen how aggressively many who want actual censorship fight to wiggle in and make more extensive lockdowns. I apologise, especially to STS, to whom I may be becoming increasingly aggressive.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:44pm

    Yes or no: Do you believe that the act of Twitter deleting spam is legally, morally, ethically, and by dictionary definition the exact same thing as the act of a government official…
    NO Nor have I ever said anything close to it. Only the government is prohibited from censorship. Private censorship is a right that must be protected as the inverse of compelled speech. Private censorship is also a means that I will go to the absolute extreme of possible alternatives before implementing myself. To the strictest sense of site rules.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:38pm

    Yes, you fail to use the dictionary to understand what words mean. Based on the dictionary, I have been in situations where I was forced to conduct private level censorship. I own it. It’s an unfortunate reality in being in public facing communication

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:32pm

    so does a bar telling a customer
    Exactly. Which is perfectly legal. Private censorship is a protected constitutional right.
    If ‘censorship’ covers everything from the government telling someone ‘you’re not allowed to say that anywhere‘ and a private property owner telling someone ‘you’re not allowed to say that on my property‘
    Government censorship is unconstitutional. Private censorship is protected as forced speech is unconstitutional.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:29pm

    Lots of other services don’t have that choice. Do you really want to shit all over them for deleting content that violates their rules
    As I said before, I always strive to convince the leadership to enable a lessor method. Be that a sandbox, collapsing, community moderation…!
    And yet, you want to shame other people for doing that⁠
    And have multiple times on this site’s commentary stated I do so with heavy heart. I feel deep shame in doing so. It’s the reason I rarely stay at sites without lessor methods. Today, only one site I moderate at is without any lesser option. That is actually likely to change with new software.
    Deletion is part of community moderation
    Excluding wiki-like services, no. Deletion is an executive action, not community.
    And if they can’t be implemented…
    Such a situation doesn’t exist for active sites today. Regardless of format.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:18pm

    If I use a 3D printer to make two identical cubes and place one on my left and one on my right…. If someone comes along with a quick pellet plastic recycler and drops the left cube in, the left cube ceases to exist! The identical right cube remains. Two posts on two services are independent of each other!

    And you’re using it in a way that waters down its definition
    Only if one chooses to argue that aspect. I disagree with the idea supported by forced up… we disagree on aspects of legal standing. But the definition is solid. Every reputable dictionary uses a slight variation of that definition. If you want further proof, most advanced thesauri have censor: delete in the list. And the reverse. There’s no win for you on that.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:04pm

    Interesting take since he and I clearly have different takes on this here. As seen in the comments to this very article.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 01:02pm

    Suppress: to restrain from a usual course or action ~TFD

    that would mean I “censored” spammers
    Based on definition, both you and I have done that. Though I prefer to null direct links and replace them with “dot” text links;. Which is transformative, not censorious. Pure advertising of legitimate services that are verifiable go in the advertising topic. Actual fraud, and potential fraud—then off to the sandbox. There the community can have fun trolling the spammer. And by fun I mean medieval level abuse. Is that the right decision? I don’t know. But fraud is the one and only class group where I condone abuse. On the rare occasion I make a mistake one way or the other? So be. 230 protects me, the service, and all other users.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 11:35am

    As soon as we get past the common progressive idea that censorship must be complete and total, which no dictionary says, we can focus on the real issue. That is the question of what makes a site like twitter et al any different than the foyer of a mall. Because the real debate is about public spaces and pseudo-public spaces. That’s the difficult question. Nobody Denys that a mall is private property hosting the public. Nobody Denys that twitter is a private communications space hosting the public. I have a serious problem with the idea that a mall must host speech. Because where is the difference between the foyer of the mall and the front foyer of a restaurant? Laws that ban speech slide on just as much as laws that force speech. I definitely don’t want some preacher standing on my front doorstep. Nor some end of the world greenie screaming cow farts cause ice cap melts.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 11:14am

    I’ve been a moderator/admin on a few different imageboards over the years
    As I have on forums, and earlier on ISPs, including AOL and CompuServe. There are cases where I can manually move garbage to the sandbox. Sometimes the only option is censorship or keeping it up. If deletions are my only choice, I do what’s best for the community. I also push hard to implement less permanent and destructive measures. With them in place, problems tend to solve themselves. It is because of my time with CompuServe and SB that I know community moderation works better than censorship. That’s the aspect you are missing. I support less censorship as an option by supporting more methods of moderation. Sandboxing. Collapsing. These are viable methods. And these methods should be implemented.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 10:47am

    Given how fractured both principle parties are at the moment we may finally get an independent chance again. Trump isn’t where my vote is going regardless of your opinion. There are some very strong social libertarians in our party now. That could take the votes from both parties. Strong gun rights. Strong gun ownership reviews. Property rights. National defence Redirect funding from international‘commitments’ to social projects here. A quality social base for all legal residents. The party offers a lot of good to both sides If the dems run a has-been, still a strong possibility, and the youngins runs a counter social Dem… The Reps will probably run a new far right “alt” type. I don’t really think it will be trump. Despite your hatred of him he’s not far right. General rubber stamp not withstanding If trump runs there may be THREE red options. Honestly though, the way things stand I don’t see 24 being a common election. There’s no agreement in either party.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 09:28am

    Oxford

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 09:26am

    If you can’t figure out the difference in supporting the choice to host and support government mandates… There’s a major difference in our understanding of the situation. Wiz are laser focused on political speech. I’m focused on all forms of communication.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 09:19am

    It absolutely does. But the first amendment prohibits government interference in speech. It prohibits government censorship. Private individuals, a person or corporate tax id, have a personal right to support or not support speech as they see fit. Much like religion, freedom of includes freedom from.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 09:14am

    No, I do not. There may be rare cases where it happens, but that’s not the general way it works. Most humans are very bad at coming up with an idea and hiding it in a completely different one. a bunch of conspiracy theorists describing their fantasy’s is not going to change my mind. The idea is in line with the likes of infowars. And ultimately, anyone who perceives fantastic messages that weren’t stated, or religious idols on their toast, are 100% personally responsible for their own actions. Hearing secret messages is not a normal thing. It’s a mental deficiency. Usuals acting on secret messages in criminal ways gets you declared legally insane. Do you really want to go that route?

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 09:05am

    You have two issues here. The harder one to sort is libel. In the us you are required to show actual malice AND actual damage, past, current, or future. So if your account is principally and primarily used to convey information as an electrical engineer you will probable survive the challenge to dismiss. The thing with social media cases is most judges actually agree with my stance when it comes to social media. That is, such accounts are not important and/or should not be important to one’s livelihood. Rather, that you should use your own targeted service for company/career communications. And that’s the problem with using someone else’s service. You are bound by their moderation choices including the right to private censorship. Honestly, the best option is a private service for yourself/job/company. Contrary to common beliefs, most of the companies that left MySpace, the origin mass social site, did not move on to newer social services as a primary service. They moved to less expensive easier to use personal site-in-a-box services. Where the TOS generally limit censorship to illegal activities. In other words, you don’t need facetwit. A Wordpress or dreamkit site will get you moving without censorship, for very little or no cost. You get better search rankings, and day one indexing on most index servers.

Next >>