Strawb 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (2330) comment rss

  • On the post: Brendan Carr Again Threatens Talk Shows That Refuse To Coddle Republicans

    Strawb ( profile ), 27 Jan, 2026 @ 12:10pm

    Right wingers don’t tell jokes.
    Then I feel weird for finding it hilarious when they act like they understand how reality works.

  • On the post: Brendan Carr Again Threatens Talk Shows That Refuse To Coddle Republicans

    Strawb ( profile ), 27 Jan, 2026 @ 09:00am

    A further pedant writes...

    Ackshually...

  • On the post: An American Murder

    Strawb ( profile ), 26 Jan, 2026 @ 11:47am

    First off, Donald Trump is not a racist. I don’t think he sincerely holds any actual belief that Minnesota is some sort of hotbed of illegal immigration in need of fixing (or that he holds any sincere beliefs at all really).
    Just because the actions in Minnesota aren't actually about immigration doesn't suddenly mean that Trump isn't a racist.

  • On the post: An American Murder

    Strawb ( profile ), 26 Jan, 2026 @ 10:55am

    Not that this comes as any surprise, but apparently Karoline Leavitt just blamed Democrats for these murders at a WH press conference. The entire administration consists of sociopaths.

  • On the post: ICE Is So Bad At Immigration Enforcement That It’s Detaining Native Americans

    Strawb ( profile ), 23 Jan, 2026 @ 01:55pm

    Most (literally over half) of ICE is hispanic. Some are black.
    Source.
    Hilariously, since NEARLY ALL Ice protestors are white women (like 80%+), someone pointed out that ICE is considerably more “diverse” than the protestors
    Source.
    They are carrying out their lawful duties. You just don’t like the law being followed.
    Which law permits them to detain and arrest US citizens, exactly?

  • On the post: Noem Says ICE Is Being Menaced By Ice Cubes, Protesters Should Be Cooped Up In ‘Free Speech Zones’

    Strawb ( profile ), 23 Jan, 2026 @ 01:51pm

    Didja know charges and convictions are different things?!? Apparently Brennan didn’t, but she’s obviously not very smart.
    Brennan is still miles ahead of you, because you apparently think being charged with something means you're guilty of it.

  • On the post: Section 230 Didn’t Fail Rand Paul. He Just Doesn’t Like the Remedy That Worked.

    Strawb ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2026 @ 11:59pm

    Instead of fighting this battle in court against the person who created this video, Paul has redirected his anger toward Section 230,
    He did get the person to take it down? the individual who posted the video finally took down the video under threat of legal penalty
    That's not the point. The point is that if Paul is still mad that this happened, he should sue the actual responsible party instead of lambasting a law that is ultimately irrelevant to the matter at hand.
    Something being hypocritical is different from being legal, those are two different arguments.
    It's fairly clear that Paul is calling it hypocritical as a criticism of Section 230 not being applied "consistently".
    However, this is kind of missing part of the point. A big part of the justification for 230 is that it gives room and incentives for companies to moderate, even as it doesn’t technically require it (as indeed, this article does, with ‘over/under’ moderation claims).
    Pointing out the consequence of removing Section 230 isn't the same as claiming that the law requires companies to moderate.
    Paul’s oped directly mentions why he finds that solution lacking: Yet, the defamatory video still has a life of its own circulated widely on the internet and the damage done is difficult to reverse.
    That's a consequence of the internet being the internet. Changing/repealing Section 230 would have no impact on that.
    Even if his is a bad solution, I do think you need to actually grapple with why he doesn’t think that’s an answer. Not just ignore it.
    Not sure how you're reading the article this way. The overall point of it is to say "Paul's understanding/argument regarding section 230 is erroneous, and if he wants to punish someone for defamation, he should go after the responsible party with the laws made for that.
    What happened to that one powerful man could just as easily happen to someone marginalized (indeed, they would find it much harder to actually pay for a defamation suit). It is a bit hypocritical of Paul to only flip once it actually happened to himself, but it is not a situation that is unique to the powerful.
    That sounds like an issue moreso with the general cost of lawsuits, not Section 230. Changing Section 230 certainly wouldn't make a difference for marginalized people getting defamed.

  • On the post: Section 230 Didn’t Fail Rand Paul. He Just Doesn’t Like the Remedy That Worked.

    Strawb ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2026 @ 11:40pm

    AC Esq., eh? Give us your legal arguments, then. With cited precedence, of course.

  • On the post: Utah Continues To Ban More Books, Even As It Racks Up More Lawsuits

    Strawb ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2026 @ 11:37pm

    Libraries not stocking certain books is not “banning them”. If it were, every book is banned, since no book is in all libraries. Just literally not what that word means.
    From Merriam-Webster: ban to prohibit especially by legal means also : to prohibit the use, performance, or distribution of If the shoe fits.

  • On the post: Evil ICE Fucks Ate Lunch At A Mexican Restaurant Just So They Could Come Back And Detain The People Who Fed Them

    Strawb ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2026 @ 12:56am

    And then came back and detained.

  • On the post: Two Major Studies, 125,000 Kids: The Social Media Panic Doesn’t Hold Up

    Strawb ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2026 @ 12:51am

    There’s also a few studies like Braghieri 2022, which is also comprehensive, well cited, and causal. And for some reason, never gets acknowledged either.
    Venturing a guess, the reason the Braghieri study may not be considered overly relevant could have something to do with these caveats as noted by the authors:
    The results presented in this paper, which rely on the staggered rollout of Facebook across US college campuses in 2004–2006, should be interpreted with caution for several reasons. First, our estimates cannot speak directly to the effects of social media features (e.g., news pages) that were introduced after the time period we analyze. Similarly, our estimates cannot speak directly to the possibility that years of experience with the platform might teach users ways to mitigate the negative effects on mental health.3 Second, despite being the core component of most mental health diagnoses, self-reports may still suffer from measurement error due to recall bias, lack of incentives, and social image concerns.4 Finally, we note that our estimates are local to college students, a population of direct interest in the discussion about the recent worsening of mental health trends among adolescents and young adults. Nevertheless, future research should test whether social media has a similar effect on the mental health of other demographic groups.

  • On the post: State Department: Detaining People For Social Media Activity Is ‘Paranoid’ And Sign Of An ‘Illegitimate Regime’ (Unless We Do It)

    Strawb ( profile ), 21 Jan, 2026 @ 12:14am

    Oh no, it's very real.

  • On the post: Everyone Knows Our Mad King’s Greenland Obsession Is Insane. Why Won’t Congress Stop It?

    Strawb ( profile ), 20 Jan, 2026 @ 12:36pm

    Unfortunately, it's life in a significant part of the Western world...

  • On the post: Everyone Knows Our Mad King’s Greenland Obsession Is Insane. Why Won’t Congress Stop It?

    Strawb ( profile ), 20 Jan, 2026 @ 12:35pm

    It’s of immense strategic importance. (some very valuable minerals, but they’ll be really hard to extract) This is absolutely, objectively true.
    Let's grant that premise. Why have no other heads of state, from any country, sought to pump up the military presence in Greenland if the threat is so clear and so imminent that Trump wants to invade? And why have there been no credible threats from Russia or China against Greenland in at least the past decade?

  • On the post: Game Publisher Bans Working With Devs That Use Any AI, Rather Than Banning Bad Uses Of AI

    Strawb ( profile ), 18 Jan, 2026 @ 03:04am

    Yes, he does. Is that the same as saying that he doesn't want him to?

  • On the post: Game Publisher Bans Working With Devs That Use Any AI, Rather Than Banning Bad Uses Of AI

    Strawb ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2026 @ 11:57am

    Absolutely no know is going to be able to tell the difference by the end of 2026.
    I would say that optimism borders on delusion.

  • On the post: Game Publisher Bans Working With Devs That Use Any AI, Rather Than Banning Bad Uses Of AI

    Strawb ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2026 @ 11:55am

    Consumers don’t want genAI in games
    Correction: people don't want bad GenAI in games. ARC Raiders uses GenAI for certain voice lines based on internal training material made from hired VA's, and that game is a massive success.
    You don’t want the market to be able to decide
    Criticising someone for making a decision based on perceived bad reasoning is not the same as saying the market shouldn't decide. Moreover, Geigner literally writes "Bender can certainly do this if he likes".
    you don’t want people to make an informed decison when platforms require GenAI usage be listed
    The author never expressed that opinion.
    you want people to have to use the environmentally disastrous plagiarism engine in everything no matter what.
    The author never expressed that opinion, either.

  • On the post: Game Publisher Bans Working With Devs That Use Any AI, Rather Than Banning Bad Uses Of AI

    Strawb ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2026 @ 02:09am

    People don't want slop. Like OP says, if it's good and not slop, I doubt they would care that much. To use an analogy, a lot of gamers don't like Unreal Engine 5 because many developers use it in such a way that the game runs like shit. But two of the biggest indie hits last year, ARC Raiders and CO: Expedition 33, are made in Unreal Engine 5. Everything comes down to where and how a tool is used.

  • On the post: Game Publisher Bans Working With Devs That Use Any AI, Rather Than Banning Bad Uses Of AI

    Strawb ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2026 @ 01:55am

    How ironic is it that a guy named Bender is against AI?

  • On the post: RFK Jr.’s FDA Removed A Webpage Of Warnings About Bogus Autism Treatments

    Strawb ( profile ), 16 Jan, 2026 @ 06:24am

    Why not focus on real problems, like price gouging, ignoring diseases that aren’t profitable, and so on?
    Because the administration doesn't care about things that won't help them line their pockets in some way.

Next >>