Somehow I not only ended up in one of these posts, but I got first place on the insightful side. Wasn't expecting that.
It's deeply ironic, but his supporters will never recognize that Musk is doing exactly what they falsely believed Dorsey was doing before.I disagree - they'll recognize it, but consider it perfectly fine because Musk's on their side.
The new owner’s insistence that the company might need to declare bankruptcy, while he continues to drive advertisers away in droves, and comes up with “subscription” ideas that don’t seem poised to move the needle very far (not to mention firing a huge percentage of the workforce without a clear understanding of who was needed to keep the site running)On the contrary, given his behavior since April I strongly suspect Musk knows exactly what he's doing - burning Twitter down to "own da libs".
Elon puts rockets into space, at first I was afraid, I was petrified.
The aim of the Age Appopropriate Design Code Act is to reduce the amount of harm suffered by children when they go online.No, it's not, and you know it's not. The aim is to let a whole bunch of people to say "Look everybody, we're Doing Something!" The aim is to get political points just before the midterms. The aim is to "stick it to Big Tech" while letting Big Telecom get away with its usual bullcrappery (so basically a content moderation bill). The aim is to tell the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to go f-ck themselves. The aim, especially with your suggestion of using facial identification/recognition, is to make all us proles become used to having little to no privacy online. George Orwell's 1984 was a warning, not a how-to guide. How in the high holy hell do you people not get that?!
I think at this point you should start including 20 Years Ago and 25 Years Ago with these posts.
Another fine example of people thinking that ‘free speech’ is shorthand for consequences-free speech....But only so long as the consequences their speech is free from are negative. They don't want to lose out on happy consequences like backpats from their fellow garbage people or a thumbs-up from Big Fat Dump, after all.
those idiot Moms for liberty (I can’t stand that those women are using the word liberty, which is my daughter’s middle name, to fight against liberty)In fairness, they are fighting for liberty. In fact, the original name they'd come up with was "Moms For Cis Hetero Conservative Christian White Guy Liberty", but they cut it down due to length and for being too on-the-nose to get support from anyone else.
"I'm an a--hole arguing in bad faith, I know I'm an a--hole arguing in bad faith, but I'm gonna be an a--hole arguing in bad faith anyway." Go away, Rotten Hymen.
Teleperformance’s Global President of Trust & Safety Akash Pugalia told Forbes the company does not use videos featuring explicit content of child abuse in trainingThat could be true. After all, who'd use CSAM as training materi... Waitasec... What did the former employees say, again?
Whitney was given access to a shared spreadsheet that she and other former employees told Forbes is filled with [...] hundreds of images of children who were naked or being abused.For those not seeing the discrepancy, Teleperformance says their training doesn't use CSAM videos, whereas the former employees are saying the training spreadsheet had tons of CSAM images. There's a difference between images and videos, and it's telling that Teleperformance only denied using the latter.
Cool, cool. How about this as a suggestion: Take a long f*ck you off a short pier, you skinheaded Nazi-fellating mouthbreather whose idea of a fun Saturday night is a lynching spree with the Klan before going to church the next day to worship Hitler and Trump. Spouting a bunch of ethnic slurs isn't "cool" or "edgy", no matter what those at 4chan and 8kun say. The idea of someone like you procreating, let alone indoctrinating your offspring, would probably horrify me if you didn't hold a Guinness World Record for smallest penis ("Not even a microscope could find it!"). tl;dr - GTFO, racist.
Apparently, an innocuous Verizon website informing its customers that propaganda was a real thing sent the right wing propaganda machine into a bit of a baseless tizzy. In turn, OAN attacked Verizon, accusing it of working to, you guessed it, unfairly censor conservatives."You're informing customers about propaganda, that means you're unfairly censoring conservatives!"
According to Verizon, OAN simply wanted to be paid more than the channel was worth[.]Which is to say, OAN wanted to be paid.
If the “free speech absolutist” wants to support “free speech”, why not invest in Parler, Truth Social, Gettr, Gab, or wherever else they need to go?Because a big part of what conservatives consider "free speech" is "owning da libs", and they can't do that on Parler, Truth, Gettr, Gab, et al. since those places are conservative echo chambers full of preaching to rhe choir and an endless cacophony of fart and shart sounds.
Asking hard questions to the powerful, at least in this kind of context, only really works if you're assertive and can quickly shut down the interviewee's bullcrappery. In this case, the end result was akin to a car knocking you down before running over you repeatedly. I might be reading things incorrectly (wouldn't be the first time) and/or being a cynic, but all things considered it feels like the point of the interview - if not the entire event - was actually to give F*cker Carlson a platform to spout bullcrappery.
Yeah, that pretty much demonstrates the hypocrisy (or one of the hypocrisies, at least) of the "pro-life" crowd - they're against abortions unless a pregnancy inconveniences them in some way, in which case they'll get an abortion. "Abortions available for me, but not for thee."
One thing I noticed about those adverts is a lack of specifics, instead painting with a broad "this stuff is bad, period" brush. "Investing is not a game"? Tell that to the rich people who can afford to let a few million dollars ride and may have the connections to manipulate the market, thus "gaming the system". Plus, investing has winners and losers just like many games. Presenting this as a game show, though... it's amusing in that rigging a game show has been a felony since 1960 and pretty much everybody at the networks and production companies take that seriously - unlike, it seems, the SEC's attitude toward rigging and corruption in the investment sector. Given that, it's perhaps no surprise that the fake game show is pretty much rigged against its contestants (barring that weird "I'm gonna do my research on my phone" bit which wouldn't be allowed on any legit game show) - the game board has only bad investment prompts and players lose money for making bad investments, meaning that the only winning move is not to play.
I read all the images and all the comments on that page. I want to cry. Many of those stories are horrifying, especially those where it's mentioned that someone tried to pull the "oh it's God's plan" card - there's even one where the girl's mother was all "yes I know my husband raped our daughter and got her pregnant, but it's God's plan". SERIOUSLY?! I... I got nothing else. I feel drained after having read all that.
I have the perfect letter you can send to the appropriate parties.Thank you for reminding me that said letter really aggravates Moms For Liberty.
I'm getting a distinct odor of "ends justify the means" from this ruling.