151–160 of 1001 posts
The same elements that make Reddit and Twitter unpleasant places to comment are also the elements that meant they sustained the discussion around the research (and conspiracies) of the ongoing Covid pandemic. There is no Covid aware community really anywhere else of remotely the same size as on Twitter and secondarily Reddit (which cracked down a bit). The weird part is 4.5 years into this pandemic there are still si…
Zuck is on a major PR campaign drive, I would not trust a word he says.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They were already doing censorship, just for different things - there was never a free for all because that eventually ends up like 4chan which is not advertiser-friendly. So you can lose credibility two ways, one by not doing any censorship because people on the internet will be the worst if you let them. Doing too much censorship is also bad because people don't like that either. Of the big causes of censorship cur…
Fighting spam and porn are a different category from censoring political viewpoonts with 25%+ adoption.
[flagged]
“I wanna get a law passed […] You burn an American flag, you go to jail for one year. Gotta do it — you gotta do it,” Trump said.
“They say, ‘Sir, that’s unconstitutional.’ We’ll make it constitutional.”
I wonder if this is coming up just before the election because of the Harris campaign’s suggested policy of capital gains tax on unrealised gains for people who have over $100m in assets? I think this is a great idea personally given what these people are doing to avoid paying tax including taking out loans against their own share portfolios. Worth thinking about what people are willing to do to not pay billions of d…
When the platforms starting censoring during the pandemic and last election cycle I remember saying they better get it right 100% of the time because the moment they get it wrong their credibility is shot. Hear we are. Censorship, beyond what’s required by law, is doomed to fail.
[flagged]
I wonder if this is coming up just before the election because of the Harris campaign’s suggested policy of capital gains tax on unrealised gains for people who have over $100m in assets? I think this is a great idea personally given what these people are doing to avoid paying tax including taking out loans against their own share portfolios. Worth thinking about what people are willing to do to not pay billions of d…
if this leads to decrease of censorship, i m not complaining
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still remember that so many people cheered when legitimate doctors and scientists were banned from Twitter or Facebook, just for questioning either the lockdown or the effectiveness or risks of the vaccines. The doctors may not be correct, but shouldn't we allow people to question science? Our government can do what it does because the people embolden them.
The challenge is trying to determine who’s legitimately trying to question the science vs who’s a crank.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd much prefer seeing us close up the tax loop holes than create an even more complex system. Taxing unrealized gains will be extremely complex, and given that they aren't allowing us to deduct unrealized losses its a pretty shitty setup for the taxpayer. We need to drastically simplify our tax code rather than further increase its complexity.
Doesn't this "close" the tax loophole in which holders of tradable assets can take out loans against those assets in perpetuity, never paying taxes on any of it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Put simply, people in these brackets don’t need more options for tax breaks.
Just curious, is "a ppp [lication]" an alt for "a[ndy] ppp"? Both arguing the same points at the same time is quite the Baader–Meinhof coincidence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion