111–120 of 204 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally agree. I looked it up out of curiosity... 1995. 25 years in tech is basically a lifetime ago. Has it changed much?
They've made it a point to not change, which is frankly refreshing. It works perfectly fine as is for what 99% of people use it for
They are too dependent on government sponsorship. 80% of their funding comes from the US government in some shape. I would imagine that a project of that importance deserves to be able to be self-sufficient. A US$2M budget/year is not that much, (m|b)illionaires making their money from the Internet could easily sponsor the project. Better yet, having grass-root sponsorship is even more important. Maybe they need mark…
> (m|b)illionaires making their money from the Internet could easily sponsor the project. The thing is: When you're the kind of person that is able to amass m-/billions, you're unlikely to be very altruistic. Most of these people had to, excuse my language, fuck over people (workers, customers, investors, the larger public) along the way in various ways. You simply can't be a billionaire without some kind of severe e…
He shifted 1/3 of his Square shares to an LLC. So far, that LLC has donated a little over 7 million.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The yelling fire example is an extreme edge case, and it’s usually used by people who would like to limit freedom of speech much more than that. I’ve never heard it being used genuinely not even once. I find it irritating: you don’t want freedom of speech? State than openly and tell me why.
Yeah, I don't want unlimited freedom of speech. Some types of speech are harmful with little benefit, from my perspective. I don't see the justification for making it permissible to yell "fire" in a movie theater.
But for the people saying the things you don't want to hear, that same speech is beneficial, with little harm.
It's easy to want to ban things you don't want to do. That's the entire point of it being protected in the first place.
This got me to think about the ACLU and what they are doing. I see some issues about accommodating justice and other issues affected by the pandemic and the intersection with liberties... it's more about looking at the compounding effect than protecting against fundamental change and fundamental threats to civil rights. But I don’t see any take on any measures governments have taken to kerb civil rights in the time o…
What should they be working on? Contact your local affiliate and tell them. "The ACLU" isn't one homogeneous entity. I've spoken with my locals about privacy and voting rights. Naive me thought I'd have ready allies. Nope. Lefties are all over the place. Agreement on one issue is no predictor for any other issues. First persuade others to acknowledge a problem. Then get commitments of effort, support. Then forge a co…
They are too dependent on government sponsorship. 80% of their funding comes from the US government in some shape. I would imagine that a project of that importance deserves to be able to be self-sufficient. A US$2M budget/year is not that much, (m|b)illionaires making their money from the Internet could easily sponsor the project. Better yet, having grass-root sponsorship is even more important. Maybe they need mark…
> (m|b)illionaires making their money from the Internet could easily sponsor the project. The thing is: When you're the kind of person that is able to amass m-/billions, you're unlikely to be very altruistic. Most of these people had to, excuse my language, fuck over people (workers, customers, investors, the larger public) along the way in various ways. You simply can't be a billionaire without some kind of severe e…
Bezos has run his company for close to 20 years without making much profit. That's tens of billions in giveaways.
And he has created enormous amounts of wealth for everyone who bought Amazon shares.
What have you done?
This got me to think about the ACLU and what they are doing. I see some issues about accommodating justice and other issues affected by the pandemic and the intersection with liberties... it's more about looking at the compounding effect than protecting against fundamental change and fundamental threats to civil rights. But I don’t see any take on any measures governments have taken to kerb civil rights in the time o…
The ACLU has largely transitioned away from civil rights absolutism towards progressive advocacy. They haven't entirely tossed it out the door, and still sometimes defend the civil rights of non-progressive groups, but the modern ACLU definitely feels it's important to contextualize liberties.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their current efforts are focused on getting lots of people released from jails and prisons, since they might catch COVID-19 if they're in jail.
Well it's far more important to have the ACLU working on advocacy and rights for LGBTQ+ where there are demonstrable acts of violence and systemic oppression rather than waste time hand holding individuals who think they should be able purchase an Arsenal of firearms and spread Covid by not obeying and respecting their fellow citizens through their non compliance. I'd say they are definitely where they need to be.. I…
Important for who, may I ask? Aren't there many groups fighting for that?
How many groups are working to promote civil rights?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Woah, took me some time to digest this -- "contextualize liberties" must be the most Orwellian phrase in existence, only thing that might come close is another phrase you used, "civil rights absolutism."
The famous “yelling fire in a crowded theory” test for free speech is an example of contextualizing liberties. There is nothing truly Orwellian about it. “Your right to swing your arms ends just where the other man’s nose begins” is another example. Society is a context where we exercise our liberties.
I can't think of a better example of something that should be protected speech, or a better example of how "reasonable" limits will get abused.
Fortunately, that ruling has been mostly overturned by now.
This got me to think about the ACLU and what they are doing. I see some issues about accommodating justice and other issues affected by the pandemic and the intersection with liberties... it's more about looking at the compounding effect than protecting against fundamental change and fundamental threats to civil rights. But I don’t see any take on any measures governments have taken to kerb civil rights in the time o…
Uh, they published a full white paper on this outlining their views: https://www.aclu.org/report/aclu-white-paper-principles-tech...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolute freedom of speech is equally as detrimental to society as totalitarian government censorship. Propaganda, misinformation, and outright lies can convincingly be passed off as truth. The vast majority of the populace neither has the time, nor the inclination to properly vet, research, and confirm the information that is presented to them. Humans rarely acknowledge their own confirmation biases, which makes it…
> Propaganda, misinformation, and outright lies Who would decide what is fake news? The federal government? Perhaps a free speech Czar appointed by the president of the US? The current president of the US certainly does talk about fake news a lot. But no thanks.