Viewing profile — throwawaysugar

[flagged]

Except this is a comment section for discussion, so it's appropriate to discuss and point out this issue which IMHO contaminates nearly all forms of media today.

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

It's way too good a word to be left unused! ;-) That whole episode is hilarious tbh

> Not saying dang never blocks users/comments, but it's exceedingly rare and I've only seen it for the most obnoxiously egregious behavior after (usually multiple) warnings. Issuin…

Article 287 is in the Penal Code, not in the Constitution. The constitution is the top dog in the legal hierarchy. The Penal Code is pretty high up there and trumps thinks like loc…

Politically, yes, you can say that in Brazil today. But legally speaking that's not allowed...

Accuracy and impartiality are not the objective. It's ad revenue.

> That is unless the individual is considered a flight risk from Brazil. Although normally even if you are considered a flight risk you often just have to turn in your passport and…

It exists for some value of "computer"

Don't ignore the "or a fine". A situation like you described doesn't commonly result in any jail time (or in any fine, tbh) Besides, I'd wager even if the whole state hated you, yo…

I think you're touching on various different issues like fraud, false advertising, racism, etc. so there's no clear answer. You would need to pick a specific case for someone to we…

> All of human progress has happened through open discussion; i thought this was obvious. We gain immunity to bad ideas by hearing them within public areas where people can argue f…

> Ah yes the judge. Who decides when I see her? Another judge decides when you see the judge that will try your case. > Do I just sit quietly in jail until then? No, you can have y…

> Brazil has been on a slippery slope regarding free speech. Citation needed. Free speech is not an "unlimited right" in Brazil (I'd argue it's not an unlimited right in the U.S. e…

[flagged]

> Free speech is a natural human right. It is, but it is not the paramount human right. Other rights, like "life" trump "liberty". One may argue that certain instances of "hate spe…

To whom?

False dichotomy. The choices aren't "100% open" or "great firewall of $country". This happens all the time in every country.

> Who determines what is considered a race? Who decides what’s “racist”? Who decides when the “no racism” law is enforced? The judge. Feel free to argue your case in court. No law …

Then a judge gets to decide whether it's enough to infringe the law or not, as is the case in all legal matters (except sometimes that is the role of a jury or arbiter, to be pedan…

What? None of those are cogent arguments. > The value of maintaining current discrimination is high enough to motivate laws protecting racists from exposing themselves publicly. A …