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 ), 19 Sep, 2022 @ 08:47am

    Correct. And I reject the fantasy that hosting equal’s acceptance. However, Forced hosting is equivalent to compelled speech. So when a government bid compels hosting of speech it becomes a first amendment issue.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 11:15pm

    which brings to mind a certain Implication
    I’m not sure where your getting the idea from but it’s not normal to jump from a gold sticker put on your shirt by a teacher in regular daily life… to a yellow emblem on an armband.
    Does that story say The vide did. Use the wayback machine Okay, and It doesn’t. Which is why it’s private, and localised, censorship. as often as you’re implying it has
    I didn’t imply anything. They have not, as far as I’m aware, given in to any of the calls. But they sure opened the door for more regulation.
    moderation as censorship
    You refer to the censorious act of deletion as if it was a good thing in moderation. I refer to content deletion, one form of moderation, by its dictionary definition… censorship.
    And what fucking happens when those “less destructive means” don’t accomplish shit
    Then either your on the lesser side of the localised population, or the site is doing something wrong.
    path to supporting forced speech
    The only way that can happen is with a new amendment to the constitution.
    If you’re trying to imply
    You have a thing for looking for issues that simply don’t exist. “Dog whistles” and implication and subtext and such. It’s make believe. I gave two very good examples of exactly what happens when discretion and moderation are censorious. What starts with a few tiny bits of material escalates to major content censorship across the board.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 07:44pm

    Gold star for you is so common parlance. I don’t think twitter has games. The video was deleted: but the story is still here https://nichegamer.com/new-sony-censorship-policy-is-forcing-even-japanese-developers-to-censor-themselves-in-japan/ Jennifers-Body-Unrated- Hills-Have-Eyes-UNRATED https://www.amazon.com/Argentos-Dracula-Rutger-Hauer/dp/B00HAUA6F2

    Gee, it’s almost like asking for the removal of sites that facilitate copyright infringement is an entirely different situation.
    And yet their stance of we don’t censor, we don’t remove, that was a strong defence. Until they dropped sites. Now they lost that ‘anything’ aspect. Yes, they are different. That’s exactly my point. When you choose censoring for one reason you open up censoring for all reasons. Soon you wind up with clean-feed style situations. You’re the one who believes they should be unable to delete speech they don’t want to host; you prove that every time you refer to that act as “censorship”. That’s a flat out lie. My position hasn’t changed as was never supporting of forced speech! The right to private censorship is a fundamental right that must be upheld. Not because the act of censoring is proper, but because the alternative is forced speech. Platforms must have the right to private censorship. They should be encouraged to use less destructive means. Your choice to change the definition so you don’t have to fight and argue with forced speech supporters is a short-term benefit. Ignoring the long term consequences of where sidestepping the whole for the immediate opens many future fights. The Hays Code and Comic Book code are prime examples of feature creep.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 05:34pm

    Defending under 230 for a dismissal is probably only a few thousand. And can also be counters with a malicious prosecution claim

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 05:30pm

    well, maybe that’s one Implication you should try harder to avoid.
    What a world you have that the first thing you think of is that. When nearly every school under high school in the country uses gold stars for awards.
    twitter
    let me know how that works out when you can’t get access to entertainment you want In uncensored form.
    We shouldn’t want the law to compel
    I didn’t call for one. I pointed to a well documented case of ongoing censorship, the term used by Sony themselves.
    No one has the right to free reach⁠
    No. And they shouldn’t. But I will continue to point to censorship. Quite a bit film on prime has been censored. And that censorship isn’t noted ip front before purchase.
    Cloudflare
    https://torrentfreak.com/?s=Cloudflare. The MPA etc has extensively increased pressure campaigns since storm people was removed.
    should’ve been legally barred from dropping those sites as clients
    Again you somehow think opposing censorship and forced hosting are the same thing. They’re not.
    even one inch right-of-center
    I think the torrent industry is about as far left an idea there could be. And the MPA ideas as far right as it gets.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 05:15pm

    Sony’s internal documents call it censorship Yes, some booksellers refuse to carry titles FCC: “ Since the FCC holds power to shut down any radio station, station managers and program directors act to censor their organizations from the inside. So, it might be said that the FCC doesn’t actually censor any station. Instead, they hold penalties, such as written warnings, fines, and the revocation of broadcast licenses, as a means of getting radio stations to police themselves.” ~ Mitch Levy Theatre: since companies stopped using the MPAA and went unclassified, theatres regularly bar those as well. In the UK: is not the US. There’s no legal reason for it in the US. None of that actual censorship has anything to do with 230 which protects hosts from legal culpability for user generated content. Or: a company can host any thing they want that is legal. And could allow users to post anything they want that os legal. And they are not responsible if they host or don’t host or remove some content and not other content.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 05:00pm

    I see trump prep a rally. (Be wild) Kylie Jane Kremer (maybe, maybe not) Louie Gohmert (clearly violent) Ted Cruz (maybe, maybe not) Eric Trump (political promise) Don Jr (maybe, maybe not) Rudy Giuliani (clearly violent) President Donald Trump (peacefully, patriotically) Josh Hawley (a sign of solidarity) Once again, no violence from Trump regarding jan 6th. No incitement to violence. Zero Two others clearly did incite. They should both be in jail

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 04:11pm

    When did gold stars stop being awarded for good things?

    they’re not censoring the people who made that content
    No, they’re not. They’re censoring the content. But there’s a line between private and public facing. Deleting email is an entirely private act. It’s interesting nobody responded to my examples of actual real censorship in entertainment posted just below this. And telling. You speak of my indirect vote for trump as enabling the far right. As much as I don’t like it, there’s a tiny sliver of truth to it, in his rubber stamp to congressional policy. But the same goes to deletion. As soon as you ok one thing, they come for all things. Eg:
    Two things:
    1) nobody with a working brain cares what the duck turds call themselves But 2) it proves my point. As soon as they bumped one site, the wolves came demanding more. And more. And then some more!

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 03:51pm

    Lying about the Hunter Biden laptop,
    Actuality much of the issue of the laptop story falls on CNN for claiming with absolutely no factual backing that it was Russian disinformation and then nearly every other major broadcaster then parroting them. . As I’ve said, the only aspect of any kind of “theft” or “fraud” had nothing to do with ballots. The blame falls on self-described news companies either pretending the story didn’t even exist or flat out created Democrat propaganda by claiming it was, was likely, was almost certainly, undoubtedly, etc Russian falsehoods. the story broke too late to change the party elections. And many Biden voters were simply voting against trump. So the laptop facts wouldn’t have changed any of them Would it have changed non-locked voters? Maybe. But not likely enough to swing the EC count. Despite his achievements, some of them fantastic like the Abraham Accords,… trump simply racked up enough actual malice in office that combined with the invented issues; that yet another run of the mill corruption issue for the opposition wouldn’t have changed anything. You only need to peruse STS’s favourite list https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/the-complete-listing-atrocities-1-1056 to find a good deal of really really bad things. Plus some really awful things that are 100% real. Combine the facts with the Dem propaganda issues (like banning travel from state sponsors of terror) (banning travel from the SOURCE state of the virus) and you turn off the majority of voters. You can’t blame the laptop story being censored for him not winning. He still wouldn’t have had the votes.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 03:28pm

    Ah, I see that now. Nightshift nut change the colour enough I couldn’t see it. Lol. My bad.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 11:42am

    Y’know, I didn’t think you’d come out and imply (or say) that losing access to a platform was censorship
    I didn’t. Tossing him from the platform is denial of service. Deleting post my is censorship
    Being booted from Twitter is not censorship.
    I agree. I didn’t say it was. As I explained there is a major difference between denying service and censoring.
    If you’re going to kiss my ass, don’t.
    It was more putting a gold star in your shirt You’re still not going to change my mind on censorship. Deleting content is censorship. Even if it’s available elsewhere. See below list of real world cases of private censorship that Paul hasn’t responded to. There are methods of moderation that stop short of actually censoring. I don’t give a fuck about a person’s politics in it. I come at it as a fan of art and entertainment that has seen the results of private censorship. As soon as you capitulate in one spot they come for more. Cloudflare banned the storm trooper site the demands to censor multi-use platforms became a public deluge.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 05:22am

    I don’t think I’ve ever read Reuters Copyright? I won’t do work for anyone if it’s not at the strictest BSD.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 18 Sep, 2022 @ 12:05am

    That’s a misconception. Based on prompting from STS I did real reading. My nal opinion is 230 makes it easy to get lawsuits dismissed. Not stop them from occurring.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 10:48pm

    If he’s been prevented from speaking his mind, why do I keep hearing his voice and read his raving ignorant lunacy,
    Because you choose to? There aren’t many platforms hosting him. It’s quite easy to not have to read his comments.
    Were those banned by Twitter or the government? In some cases by the government. In some cases by private companies.
    Sony is censoring games that are uncensored on other platforms. Book store choose not to carry titles. Such as Amazon. Radio stations censor music every day. Chain theatres rarely carry NC-17 films. Cable companies cut content despite there being no legal reason to do so. Explain how any of those are government bodies censoring.

  • On the post: Court Dumps Trump Lawsuit Claiming Hillary Clinton Rigged The 2016 Election He Actually Won

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 10:42pm

    Worth a damn? It’s a prime example of self righteous stupidity. And they did nail her to the wall for it. Every investigating party officially condemned or denounced her actions. Then they changed the law. So no other turds could repeat her utter stupidity and not be held accountable.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 10:39pm

    The militant christian power movement in the Republican party is a threat to every person not 100% part of their cult of cloud. I don’t know of any demographic being tortured today. I can expect with a far right power train that will change come 24 if the dems can’t get their heads out of the collective arse of a joke. Because many of these people coming up will bring out racks and balls and kill us all very, very, very slowly.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 10:30pm

    I didn’t ask for pity.

    it. I held my nose and voted for Clinton and Biden because they were the only viable candidates
    That’s generally what I did in 2020.
    now you want to say you’re concerned about the GOP
    Yes. Today, 2022/9/18. I am concerned about the new wave of GOP power. I don’t own an anything in the gop extremes. I voted for one single republican one.
    you fucked around
    I always do. I don’t believe in monogamy, marriage, etc. not sure what that has to do with republicans, other than people like me Lisa them off.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 07:24pm

    I don’t know how many other ways I can say trump is a self-centred piece of crap. As long as the Dems don’t run clinton or another mentally challenged geriatric… or some brains dead moron! Even then, highly unlikely. The republican power has shifted into near-militant intolerance. Trump was a better choice for me vs Clinton at the time. Today a Christian rubber stamp… I could fathom after 22 I’d even, and clearly under duress, vote for the bytch. Immediately vomit, And hope she dies in office. Because the Republican Party power has become a threat to my family, friends, and self. Clinton may make the majority of the country (and other countries) die slowly, poor, hungry, … but at least we wouldn’t be tortured.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 07:13pm

    Guess it’s not worth telling you your incorrect.

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

    LostInLoDOS ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2022 @ 07:12pm

    Too much non-stated searching

    What I ignore is the idea that Twitter deleting any post from its service is “prohibiting or suppressing” speech in any way
    the suppression or prohibition of any parts of books, films, news, etc. that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security ~Oxford Deletion of a post sounds like suppression to me. Maybe you have some personal modification of that word’s definition as well?
    Only in the minds of people like you.
    People who know what the definition of the word means?
    or deleting posts
    See above definition
    Except it isn’t, or else every website that has ever deleted any kind of third-party content⁠—even if said content pops up somewhere else literally a minute after its deletion on the origin site⁠—has engaged in censorship.
    Exactly. Congrats 🥳
    well, you can see where The Implication is going.
    I didn’t imply I stated my belief: it is my personal opinion that censorship is a reprehensible act and those individuals that do so are either misguided (hopefully twitter) or scum.
    And yet, by arguing that moderation is censorship, you’re also arguing against moderation of any kind…
    See, this is where you go off the rails. I argue that deletion is censorship. There are many forms of moderation that are possible with reaching that level. I support lesser levels of moderation quite happily!
    You are, regardless of whether you like this fact, playing on the same team …
    Actually I’m a nude streaker in this contest flying a banner that corrects the errors of both sides.
    …make an act of moderation seem as “reprehensible” as an act of censorship…
    Deleting comments is censorship. Flagging, tagging, folding, moving and linking, age gating, collapsing, colour hiding, … etc, none of those options reach censorship. The material itself hasn’t been barred.
    And yet, because they did that, you would imply that they’re a morally heinous piece of shit.
    See above on misguided
    have to suffer through reading hate and bigotry and bullshit There are plenty of options for moderation that land short of censorship. WHEN IN THE BLOOD-SOAKED SATANIC FUCK DID TWITTER PREVENT DONALD TRUMP FROM SPEAKING HIS MIND
    When (if) they deleted his comments as a user. Again after he was denied service to the private platform when they deleted his prior comments.
    there are plenty of archives of his tweets, after all
    Wow, I guess there has never been a banned book, album, game, or film then. If you could go someplace else and get it?
    you’re no better than the people who want to force their speech onto Twitter…
    You are entitled to believe that, despite the long list of evidence that I am opposed to forced speech and support non-censorial moderation.
    and I’ll keep doing it
    Ohkay. some people still believe the world is flat. Or 6000 years old. Or that humans fought dinosaurs. That vaccines contain microchips.
    even if it literally fucking kills me
    I sure hope not. Nobody else here engages in detailed discussion and debate. You have even changed my mind on some occasion. Such as 230. Seeing it as necessary in a country where competent legal representation is not a right in practice And moving me to research wind farm-bird mortality. Seeing the problem not being windmills but the stupidity of their design. And quite a few others. Hell, you even tempered my view on censorship, seeing being forced to host a preacher on my front lawn as problematic. (The need for an opaque sound proof chamber for him to use and all). And, despite you’re beliefs, I find you quite educated. If nothing else, I respect your opinion, even if I disagree completely.

Next >>