Recommended Posts

(edited)

.

Edited by BLA
  • Like 3
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 11/1/2020 at 11:36 AM, BLA said:

.

.

Edited by BLA
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BLA said:

Is it too late ?

Nope, quite using their services. Facebook and Twitter aren't the only platforms. I use neither anymore. 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Nope, quite using their services. Facebook and Twitter aren't the only platforms. I use neither anymore. 

^ Correct

Don't like them don't use them.  These are not public services, they are for-profit enterprises.

Remember the saying "We reserve the right to limit service to anyone"?  If they don't want hate-speech or dangerous misinformation on their sites that is their prerogative.  It is distasteful to the majority of the customers.

 

Attempting to legislate internet content is something you conspiracy theory types should NOT want. Think about it closely - he wants to take away freedom by removing protecting from lawsuits. How do you think "alternative media" will hold up against unending lawsuits?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The platforms in question are corporations, not government. In the absence of any law to the contrary, presumably they have a fundamental right per US law to operate as they see fit. Morally, though, the issue is very murky. Should corporations be socially responsible? To what extent? etc.  How this develops, or not, will be interesting to observe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

It should be up to Congress to set the rules of the road for all information. They don’t so corporations make choices that benefit themselves. The Supreme Court says corporations are people so design your corporate rules around your desired target audiance, influence and profit goals. It’s all good, quit griping. Corporate power has for good and bad influenced all congressional legislation, Supreme Court and the Presidency, It is what it is.

Edited by Boat
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, frankfurter said:

The platforms in question are corporations, not government. In the absence of any law to the contrary, presumably they have a fundamental right per US law to operate as they see fit. Morally, though, the issue is very murky. Should corporations be socially responsible? To what extent? etc.  How this develops, or not, will be interesting to observe.

Interestingly, if I own a restaurant and refuse service to a customer, I'm in violation of the law unless that customer represents a specific health threat (such as no shirt or shoes). Those laws were passed to fight those Southern democrats who were continuously guilty of discrimination in their places of business (and drinking fountains, rest rooms, schools etc). 

Dorsey et al are guilty of discrimination. Even a newspaper can't sell just to whites or blacks. That the DOJ hasn't taken this obvious tack proves they're not really interested in winning. Every conservative needs to self identify as being of the R gender, effective immediately. Any further discrimination against R's must be dealt with immediately and harshly. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dorsey and his buddies at Facebook, Google and Bill Gates all need to be kneecapped, These companies have decades of your personal life and business information sitting on servers and must be BROKEN UP AND BROUGHT DOWN.......

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, RichieRich216 said:

Dorsey and his buddies at Facebook, Google and Bill Gates all need to be kneecapped, These companies have decades of your personal life and business information sitting on servers and must be BROKEN UP AND BROUGHT DOWN.......

Agree.  And it's extremely sad, really.  What they brought to the world in tech and media could be the most wonderful and helpful thing ever: free speech, worldwide.  A place where free speech is valued above all.  Let regimes and their unfortunate citizenry around the world be exposed to that which they oppress nationally, and have themselves removed by the free will of the people, if that's what the people want and aspire to.  

What Twitter and the others are doing is falling into the trap of dictators and military "rulers" the world over.  I don't want the technology to disappear; that would be a backwards move.  Just remove the CEOs, dismantle the Boards, pass federal regulations based on Constitutional principals and pass laws that protect free and open discourse on social media, the sharing of people's perspectives worldwide, the advances in human rights advance of the principal of the basic human right to free speech in all its forms.  No filtering of anything other than "I'll get you, my little pretty" talk and threats.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

Interestingly, if I own a restaurant and refuse service to a customer, I'm in violation of the law unless that customer represents a specific health threat (such as no shirt or shoes). Those laws were passed to fight those Southern democrats who were continuously guilty of discrimination in their places of business (and drinking fountains, rest rooms, schools etc). 

Dorsey et al are guilty of discrimination. Even a newspaper can't sell just to whites or blacks. That the DOJ hasn't taken this obvious tack proves they're not really interested in winning. Every conservative needs to self identify as being of the R gender, effective immediately. Any further discrimination against R's must be dealt with immediately and harshly. 

good point. I wondered if discrimination could be charged. I see Google has since reviewed its policy and claims now no posts will be deleted. Seems the problem was technical, and thus excusable. Interesting to see how Americans apply their laws.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 11/1/2020 at 10:57 PM, Old-Ruffneck said:

Nope, quite using their services. Facebook and Twitter aren't the only platforms. I use neither anymore. 

What email, operating system, ISP or browser are available. 

Dose the USPS have the right to open my mail and record personal data.

Does the telephone company have the right to collect all my telephone calls and analyze to whom, where and when I make the call and then sell it or use it against me ? 

The government needs a warrant from federal judge to see that info but Jack Dorsey (many others) can just take it, use it and abuse it at will.

 

Edited by BLA
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BLA said:

What email, operating system, ISP or browser are available. 

Dose the USPS have the right to open my mail and record personal data.

Does the telephone company have the right to collect all my telephone calls and analyze to whom, where and when I make the call and then sell it or use it against me ? 

 

It doesn't seem right, does it?  I think Big Tech won those arguments in court and I also think there was a bias which applied to their win.  It should be looked at anew, and may be part of the Trump driven challenges to social media, which the Trump administration, and donors, are pushing through the courts pretty much continuously right now.  I am hopeful that the courts will see the issue differently, now that the uses of said data have been allowed to mature and show their rather questionable uses, and change their previous rulings in favor of privacy.  They can ask my permission each time for now, but it needs to be done away with.  IMHO, of course.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

13 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Interestingly, if I own a restaurant and refuse service to a customer, I'm in violation of the law unless that customer represents a specific health threat (such as no shirt or shoes). Those laws were passed to fight those Southern democrats who were continuously guilty of discrimination in their places of business (and drinking fountains, rest rooms, schools etc). 

Dorsey et al are guilty of discrimination. Even a newspaper can't sell just to whites or blacks. That the DOJ hasn't taken this obvious tack proves they're not really interested in winning. Every conservative needs to self identify as being of the R gender, effective immediately. Any further discrimination against R's must be dealt with immediately and harshly. 

 

How about no mask?

"Discrimination" against a non-visible thing like being stupid is hilarious.  You could always take off the MAGA hat and go about undetected.

Edited by Enthalpic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, BLA said:

What email, operating system, ISP or browser are available. 

Dose the USPS have the right to open my mail and record personal data.

Does the telephone company have the right to collect all my telephone calls and analyze to whom, where and when I make the call and then sell it or use it against me ? 

 

If that mail crosses borders customs absolutely has the right to open and inspect that mail. The idea that the internet is somehow under US control is laughable arrogance.

The idea your own government isn't listening to everything is even more funny. You gave away all privacy rights due to terror concerns long ago; and before that they just snooped illegally.

Some comments here sound like people want to nationalize the media or regulate it to fit a agenda...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

On 11/1/2020 at 11:58 PM, frankfurter said:

In the absence of any law to the contrary, presumably they have a fundamental right per US law to operate as they see fit.

No, they do not. 

In the USA, additional to the Statutes and Regulations created by government, we have a body of law known as "tort law."  If one entity, a person or corporation, harms another person by its acts and practices, then they can be sued for money damages and injunctive relief. Further, a nice chunk of US tort law flows from "bad acts" damages suits, sometimes referred to as "breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing."  Malicious bad acts, or intentional acts as contrasted with negligent acts, are especially punishable by the use of "exemplary damages."  Much of American corporate propaganda is directed at constraining such punishing-damages awards, what corporations have labelled as "tort reform."   For Americans here, don't be fooled.  Nobody gets sued for running a clean ship.  The lawsuits start when the corporation behaves in a sleazy, deceitful, reprehensible way, and you see that when certain "managers" get hired out of certain "business schools" where they should never have been admitted. Harvard has been the worst offender, admitting trashy people as students, those with no moral compass.  Shame on them. 

Edited by Jan van Eck
typing error
  • Great Response! 7
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

20 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

If that mail crosses borders customs absolutely has the right to open and inspect that mail. The idea that the internet is somehow under US control is laughable arrogance.

The idea your own government isn't listening to everything is even more funny. You gave away all privacy rights due to terror concerns long ago; and before that they just snooped illegally.

Some comments here sound like people want to nationalize the media or regulate it to fit a agenda...

 

We do control and regulate our Telecommunication within the United States , of which the internet is part. 

If Europe can legislate OPT-IN so can U.S.

The one obstacle is the $ millions  from lobbyist, think tanks and campaign contributions. There is more money being thrown around DC then you can imagine.

 

What email system, operating system, ISP or Browser are available that will not collect , not use and protect my personal data.

I bought a new android cellphone this summer. It would not let me update the software or use the play store without putting in my email. They also know my cell number.  Their systems can combine all past and future data. 

 

The government needs a warrant from federal judge to see that info but .   .   .   .  

 .   .   .   TWITTER'S JACK DORSEY (many others) can just TAKE IT , USE IT and ABUSE IT at will.

Edited by BLA
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They need to be broken up! The Media was supposed to be a check and balance, THATS HISTORY, These Social Media platforms we supposed to be people, ALL PEOPLE to be able to express their opinions and have a dialogue, There revenue stream was ADVERTISING, thus getting the exemptions provided by Federal Government! THEY ABUSED THIS FOR A SMALL GROUP INSIDE THESE SOCIAL MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS TO PUSH PERSONAL OPINIONS! They violated the agreement and MUST PAY FOR THE STUPIDITY OF DOING SO!!!!

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly the solution is simple. Remove any and all "First Amendment" protections from these companies and let the ambulance chasing lawyers have at them. Your post got yanked? Sue the bastards! Your search results are being shadow banned? Sue the bastards! Let John Q. Public win a few big lawsuits and this problem will self heal in no time. 

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did BLA overstep when he shut down threads hes tired of by making the title (.)? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

You can tell the far right just can’t handle conversations in a free speech government. Like Trump well just assume their German or paid by Germans. That would indicate the growing relationship between Trump and Putin. Lol 

Do you remember WWII? The last German trying to take away free speech?

I do respect bierocks and bratwurst. There is good in every culture.

Edited by Boat
  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rob Kramer said:

Did BLA overstep when he shut down threads hes tired of by making the title (.)? 

I've gone back to a thread I created months ago. I don't see how to change the title, although I can change the tags. Perhaps you know a way? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rob Kramer said:

Did BLA overstep when he shut down threads hes tired of by making the title (.)? 

I cannot figure that out.  Enigma.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

5 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Honestly the solution is simple. Remove any and all "First Amendment" protections from these companies and let the ambulance chasing lawyers have at them. Your post got yanked? Sue the bastards! Your search results are being shadow banned? Sue the bastards! Let John Q. Public win a few big lawsuits and this problem will self heal in no time. 

Sue OilPrice.com!  The free service they provide is not meeting your standards!

Like seriously - live in reality for a moment -  what damages do you suffer from having a post deleted?  Do you think you can afford better lawyers than Google or Facebook?   Would they ever pay out a landmark settlement?  Will any lawyer take a case against a monster corporation when the expected compensation and chance of winning is essentially zero?

 

Ward level anti-logic...

 

Edited by Enthalpic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I've gone back to a thread I created months ago. I don't see how to change the title, although I can change the tags. Perhaps you know a way? 

Mabey BLA will comment on it. I've made one topic and it's long forgotten and uncommented on lol. I haven't seen him say he wasn't the editor and the question has been implied. And we have selva saying hes editing it. Soooooo (.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

No, they do not. 

In the USA, additional to the Statutes and Regulations created by government, we have a body of law known as "tort law."  If one entity, a person or corporation, harms another person by its acts and practices, then they can be sued for money damages and injunctive relief. Further, a nice chunk of US tort law flows from "bad acts" damages suits, sometimes referred to as "breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing."  Malicious bad acts, or intentional acts as contrasted with negligent acts, are especially punishable by the use of "exemplary damages."  Much of American corporate propaganda is directed at constraining such punishing-damages awards, what corporations have labelled as "tort reform."   For Americans here, don't be fooled.  Nobody gets sued for running a clean ship.  The lawsuits start when the corporation behaves in a sleazy, deceitful, reprehensible way, and you see that when certain "managers" get hired out of certain "business schools" where they should never have been admitted. Harvard has been the worst offender, admitting trashy people as students, those with no moral compass.  Shame on them. 

Tort: a very interesting point to make. Given the EULA, I wonder how a tort suit could stand. The USA is the most litigious nation, so perhaps someone somewhere sometime will use tort to challenge and limit the power of Google and the like. If so, the case could set a world-wide precedent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.