Viewing profile — anonbcpolitics

Previous guy tried, but the new "Big guy" nixed the EO before it could go into effect. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020-28... Feel free to link any biased …

You don't need to be a lawyer to read this bill, it's pretty short and clear. Even if you don't understand all of it, it's good to read the source so you know you're not getting ch…

I clearly defined what and why. Sorry one word triggered you so bad you couldn't add to the conversation. Pick from a thesaurus and move on.

You focused on the wrong part, I could have left out "to govern". My point was there's no evidence of anyone using DMs, we're talking about public tweets. And there's no use talkin…

It's not a new myth but a new suggestion. 230 was written for a bulletin board site in '96. Twitter and other social media behemoths still enjoy this protection. There's been propo…

> I think anonbcpolitics was ignoring DMs. Yes, because there's no evidence of anyone using DMs to govern. We don't know if a politician uses Signal, Twitter/IG DM, or other 1:1 co…

> If Twitter is a national security risk because people can hack it to speak in the official voice of prominent leaders, or discover state secrets through direct messages, that is …