oh man, red-pillers are so fucking mad trump vetoed the military spending bill
it's kinda beautiful in a way
He did?
...why?
I haven't kept a very clear picture of what has been attached to which bill.
some vagaries about how it doesn't support veterans (accurate but not for the reasons he likely believes) and because it provided for changing the name of bases named after confederate officers (he wants to keeps our "history")
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
It would mean the death of the internet as we know it.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+9
Options
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
if they are made directly liable for speech allowed on their site I don't think "but we don't even try to moderate it" will be a valid defense but I could be wrong
0
Options
Ubikoh pete, that's later. maybe we'll be dead by thenRegistered Userregular
if they are made directly liable for speech allowed on their site I don't think "but we don't even try to moderate it" will be a valid defense but I could be wrong
that was the state of the law prior to Section 230, it's why CompuServe (no moderation) won, and Prodigy (moderation) lost.
but i think that was defamation/civil stuff
maybe like direct threats and other criminal stuff would go away
edit: i'm not saying Section 230 is definitely good, but i don't think repealing it without anything in it's place would necessarily make the internet better overnight
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
edited December 2020
Many things would change about the modern internet, especially social sites like fb/twitter, if you substantially curtailed or eliminated section 230 but I think "end of the internet as we know it" is vastly overhyping it.
I also think the current state of affairs is a complete joke; 230 is supposed to make it so that sites that themselves don't exercise "editorial control" won't be liable for the posts of users but we're obviously well past that at this point. FB/Twitter are now clearly moderated, they're just moderated shittily. It made sense when the big social site was craigslist, but websites large and small have already accepted that they're liable (to the RIAA at any rate) in civil suits in any number of matters where the litigant is a large corporate entity, so 230 mostly exists to lock out small/individual litigants.
HeadCreepsNOW IS THE TIME FOR DRINKING!Registered Userregular
edited December 2020
Oh, is he right Washington Post? Is bipartisanship worth a try?
It sure worked real swell for Obama
HeadCreeps on
0
Options
turtleantGunpla Dadis the best.Registered Userregular
Social media sucks in a lot of ways but also I live in the middle of nowhere surrounded by racist shit bags (my county went 89% for trump in november) so like I'd kinda like to keep being able to talk to people that don't make me want to be able to set fire to them with my brain.
Social media sucks in a lot of ways but also I live in the middle of nowhere surrounded by racist shit bags (my county went 89% for trump in november) so like I'd kinda like to keep being able to talk to people that don't make me want to be able to set fire to them with my brain.
Yeah I said what I said mainly for the meme because you’re totally right.
I have spent ages curating an enjoyable Twitter niche, and I would legit be sad if I lost this place
Many things would change about the modern internet, especially social sites like fb/twitter, if you substantially curtailed or eliminated section 230 but I think "end of the internet as we know it" is vastly overhyping it.
I also think the current state of affairs is a complete joke; 230 is supposed to make it so that sites that themselves don't exercise "editorial control" won't be liable for the posts of users but we're obviously well past that at this point. FB/Twitter are now clearly moderated, they're just moderated shittily. It made sense when the big social site was craigslist, but websites large and small have already accepted that they're liable (to the RIAA at any rate) in civil suits in any number of matters where the litigant is a large corporate entity, so 230 mostly exists to lock out small/individual litigants.
the original intent of the section when it was adopted in 96 was iirc that hosts of websites would not be liable for speech on sites on their networks; you can still personally be sued if you threaten or libel or whatever someone on the internet, but the host cannot. This was a necessary thing because at the time it was not realistic to expect a host to be able to police all the content someone might choose to throw up on a livejournal page or whatever
in the current era it's less clear that twitter/fb/et al should have such a complete liability shield but I think it's still better to have it than to have nothing; trump just wants to be able to sue as many people as possible to intimidate people who insult him, as is his habit
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
+5
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
Someone point out to Biden he is old and he needs to think of his legacy beyond cowboy trump.
After a year of half assed caution and fiscal conservative neoliberal "solutions", some far left cowboy liberal legislation would due the country good.
2020 was the deadliest year in American history and recovery isn't going to come from leadership playing it safe with their choices.
Someone point out to Biden he is old and he needs to think of his legacy beyond cowboy trump.
After a year of half assed caution and fiscal conservative neoliberal "solutions", some far left cowboy liberal legislation would due the country good.
2020 was the deadliest year in American history and recovery isn't going to come from leadership playing it safe with their choices.
Joe Biden was the safe choice candidate. This is all his administration is going to be.
Aistan on
+7
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Someone point out to Biden he is old and he needs to think of his legacy beyond cowboy trump.
After a year of half assed caution and fiscal conservative neoliberal "solutions", some far left cowboy liberal legislation would due the country good.
2020 was the deadliest year in American history and recovery isn't going to come from leadership playing it safe with their choices.
Joe Biden was the safe choice candidate. This is all his administration is going to be.
He still has plenty of time to end up being a worse president than Trump.
she's even dumber than I thought, then. this shit is how you get fascism.
Confidence in institutions is at rock bottom. Across the political spectrum, people have realised they need a government to help them out of the shit. A milquetoast, do-nothing government is the antithesis of what we need.
Of course the fascists are going to be all over a Biden government for not fixing the issues people are facing. Shit is going to be bad.
Someone point out to Biden he is old and he needs to think of his legacy beyond cowboy trump.
After a year of half assed caution and fiscal conservative neoliberal "solutions", some far left cowboy liberal legislation would due the country good.
2020 was the deadliest year in American history and recovery isn't going to come from leadership playing it safe with their choices.
i think you're completely right in what you're saying, but biden got put in the seat specifically because he won't ever do any far left cowboy anything. he's a conservative at heart and he's never pretended to be anything else, going all the way back to when he was an unapologetic segregationist
as an aside, i find it really baffling seeing all these high-profile twitter progressives (which is a word that's lost all meaning) who shilled for biden during the election acting shocked that his cabinet is such a mess and he's already walking back the completely meager insufficient shit he talked about thinking about looking into forming a committee to analyze the feasibility of during his campaign. this is who the dude has always been, it really should come as no surprise to people a lot of whose job it is to be politics knowers
when biden says he wants to work with republicans, what he means is he wants to give them everything they ask for in exchange for a favor once in awhile maybe, if it's not too much trouble
Its going to rock when he pushes out some dog shit right wing omnibus and the entire liberal machine from the bottom up tells us its the best he could have ever conceivably done
when biden says he wants to work with republicans, what he means is he wants to give them everything they ask for in exchange for a favor once in awhile maybe, if it's not too much trouble
Its going to rock when he pushes out some dog shit right wing omnibus and the entire liberal machine from the bottom up tells us its the best he could have ever conceivably done
Y'know when in 2016, Hillary lost -- I was legitimately distraught for a little while despite not being very vested in the idea of American exceptionalism -- I went to school and studied modern U.S. history. I'd read a lot of things that disillusioned me against buying into that idea, like Chalmers Johnson's 'The Sorrows of Empire', Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing Consent', and seen Daniel Ellsberg speak about his experience being a whistleblower about the U.S. straight up making up whole-cloth the justification for getting into the Vietnam War.
Nonetheless, what I've realized in hindsight is that I'd come up from a relatively comfortable place in my life, at least financially speaking. And I had to come around to recognizing the idea that I was caught up with the fantasy that somebow having leadership that was respectable, composed, well-spoken, pragmatic and 'sensible' -- mattered to some level more than it really did when to producing tangible moral good for us as a community or society.
And to be clear, I don't fucking excuse this alternative, with Trump, because it's horrible for a myriad of other reasons that as a history major, I really struggle with because damn if I don't see how tenuous things have gotten.
But I totally get the centrists way of thinking, because I really was in that same state of mind for a good amount of my life -- its absolutely just comfortable-ass people doing their damn level best to justify the return of the incredibly thin veneer that for their whole lives made a host of altogether, differently horrible things seem respectable -- just because they don't want to think too hard about well, hey that's the way things have been; and I'm personally very comfortable with this if I don't think too hard on it. And damned if they think there's any way to change it, that isn't just people being naive. A paucity of imagination, a tragedy in and of itself.
user on
+6
Options
MaddocI'm Bobbin Threadbare, are you my mother?Registered Userregular
When I have variously said that Biden is a Republican I don't just mean that as "He is not left leaning enough for me" because that would apply to literally every Democrat
I mean that as "He has throughout his career worked toward furthering the goals of the Republican party, often to the detriment of the Democratic party"
His handling of the Clarence Thomas hearing was wild
+29
Options
Donovan PuppyfuckerA dagger in the dark isworth a thousand swords in the morningRegistered Userregular
Its going to rock when he pushes out some dog shit right wing omnibus and the entire liberal machine from the bottom up tells us its the best he could have ever conceivably done
The Biden/Harris administration is going to be the most progressive US adminstration the world has ever seen, and if you disagree here are 83 paragraphs of me explaining how you are technically wrong in many ways, so there.
Posts
it's kinda beautiful in a way
He did?
...why?
I haven't kept a very clear picture of what has been attached to which bill.
some vagaries about how it doesn't support veterans (accurate but not for the reasons he likely believes) and because it provided for changing the name of bases named after confederate officers (he wants to keeps our "history")
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
this is one of those rare things the man is right about, but not in the way he thinks and not for the reasons he came by his position
it would be Interesting to be able to sue twitter for allowing nazis to post credible threats of violence at you
hitting hot metal with hammers
Don’t you threaten me with a good time
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
that was the state of the law prior to Section 230, it's why CompuServe (no moderation) won, and Prodigy (moderation) lost.
but i think that was defamation/civil stuff
maybe like direct threats and other criminal stuff would go away
edit: i'm not saying Section 230 is definitely good, but i don't think repealing it without anything in it's place would necessarily make the internet better overnight
edit 2: i think this is a good overview
https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/21/18700605/section-230-internet-law-twenty-six-words-that-created-the-internet-jeff-kosseff-interview
I also think the current state of affairs is a complete joke; 230 is supposed to make it so that sites that themselves don't exercise "editorial control" won't be liable for the posts of users but we're obviously well past that at this point. FB/Twitter are now clearly moderated, they're just moderated shittily. It made sense when the big social site was craigslist, but websites large and small have already accepted that they're liable (to the RIAA at any rate) in civil suits in any number of matters where the litigant is a large corporate entity, so 230 mostly exists to lock out small/individual litigants.
It sure worked real swell for Obama
Yeah I said what I said mainly for the meme because you’re totally right.
I have spent ages curating an enjoyable Twitter niche, and I would legit be sad if I lost this place
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
hitting hot metal with hammers
the original intent of the section when it was adopted in 96 was iirc that hosts of websites would not be liable for speech on sites on their networks; you can still personally be sued if you threaten or libel or whatever someone on the internet, but the host cannot. This was a necessary thing because at the time it was not realistic to expect a host to be able to police all the content someone might choose to throw up on a livejournal page or whatever
in the current era it's less clear that twitter/fb/et al should have such a complete liability shield but I think it's still better to have it than to have nothing; trump just wants to be able to sue as many people as possible to intimidate people who insult him, as is his habit
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
JUST DO IT!
DO IT!!!!
WIPE THEM AWAY YOU BASTARD!!!!
hitting hot metal with hammers
After a year of half assed caution and fiscal conservative neoliberal "solutions", some far left cowboy liberal legislation would due the country good.
2020 was the deadliest year in American history and recovery isn't going to come from leadership playing it safe with their choices.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Joe Biden was the safe choice candidate. This is all his administration is going to be.
He still has plenty of time to end up being a worse president than Trump.
Confidence in institutions is at rock bottom. Across the political spectrum, people have realised they need a government to help them out of the shit. A milquetoast, do-nothing government is the antithesis of what we need.
Of course the fascists are going to be all over a Biden government for not fixing the issues people are facing. Shit is going to be bad.
Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better
bit.ly/2XQM1ke
i think you're completely right in what you're saying, but biden got put in the seat specifically because he won't ever do any far left cowboy anything. he's a conservative at heart and he's never pretended to be anything else, going all the way back to when he was an unapologetic segregationist
as an aside, i find it really baffling seeing all these high-profile twitter progressives (which is a word that's lost all meaning) who shilled for biden during the election acting shocked that his cabinet is such a mess and he's already walking back the completely meager insufficient shit he talked about thinking about looking into forming a committee to analyze the feasibility of during his campaign. this is who the dude has always been, it really should come as no surprise to people a lot of whose job it is to be politics knowers
hitting hot metal with hammers
year huh?
cause like, lefties and republicans already hate him
No see they meant $50k total. Easy mistake.
when biden says he wants to work with republicans, what he means is he wants to give them everything they ask for in exchange for a favor once in awhile maybe, if it's not too much trouble
hitting hot metal with hammers
right-wing democrats will only turn on him if he starts doing things the left wing wants
so, they'll never turn on him
More on this story
https://inthesetimes.com/article/joe-biden-cut-medicare-social-security-retirement-age
Y'know when in 2016, Hillary lost -- I was legitimately distraught for a little while despite not being very vested in the idea of American exceptionalism -- I went to school and studied modern U.S. history. I'd read a lot of things that disillusioned me against buying into that idea, like Chalmers Johnson's 'The Sorrows of Empire', Noam Chomsky's 'Manufacturing Consent', and seen Daniel Ellsberg speak about his experience being a whistleblower about the U.S. straight up making up whole-cloth the justification for getting into the Vietnam War.
Nonetheless, what I've realized in hindsight is that I'd come up from a relatively comfortable place in my life, at least financially speaking. And I had to come around to recognizing the idea that I was caught up with the fantasy that somebow having leadership that was respectable, composed, well-spoken, pragmatic and 'sensible' -- mattered to some level more than it really did when to producing tangible moral good for us as a community or society.
And to be clear, I don't fucking excuse this alternative, with Trump, because it's horrible for a myriad of other reasons that as a history major, I really struggle with because damn if I don't see how tenuous things have gotten.
But I totally get the centrists way of thinking, because I really was in that same state of mind for a good amount of my life -- its absolutely just comfortable-ass people doing their damn level best to justify the return of the incredibly thin veneer that for their whole lives made a host of altogether, differently horrible things seem respectable -- just because they don't want to think too hard about well, hey that's the way things have been; and I'm personally very comfortable with this if I don't think too hard on it. And damned if they think there's any way to change it, that isn't just people being naive. A paucity of imagination, a tragedy in and of itself.
I mean that as "He has throughout his career worked toward furthering the goals of the Republican party, often to the detriment of the Democratic party"
His handling of the Clarence Thomas hearing was wild
The Biden/Harris administration is going to be the most progressive US adminstration the world has ever seen, and if you disagree here are 83 paragraphs of me explaining how you are technically wrong in many ways, so there.