181–190 of 254 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to work for a former U.S. Marine who had a good quote - "don't write when you can speak, don't speak when you can nod, and don't nod when you can wink".
That quote is at least a 100 years old, but it's pretty hard to follow in practice. Especially at a digital communications company!
"In each case, these people – good people, normal people without political power – were persecuted because their viewpoints were, in one way or another, perceived as a threat to the established order" That's true, but the investigation is specifically about criminal actions, not persecution for beliefs. And if I am reading the subpoena correctly, they're basically looking for data on moderation activity and policies.…
Second, when government need to know about criminal activities, they should specify who is it that they want to investigate and for what case, similar to how law enforcement do with a judge request, and not just scan everyone in the platform.
This should be an interesting comment section, because HN was almost unanimously opposed to Gab and Parler around the time of the capitol riots, but recently I’ve seen more of a pro free speech angle here, especially as it relates to Facebook censoring links in private messages.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"wrong place" meaning "inside the capitol at all" but certainly non-violent: https://www.indystar.com/story/news/crime/2021/06/23/capitol...
“Wrong place” in my comment meant you were at the rally and went along with it. At the point you’re storming a federal building, you should know you’re breaking all manner of laws.
> American citizens may have freedom of speech, but they find themselves with vanishingly few public forums in which to exercise it fully. Well put. As we've also seen from numerous leaks and incidents over the years, big business and government often works hand-in-hand, with revolving door policies and barely legal indirect bribes happening regularly. That the government is now seeking to curtail the First Amendment…
> big business and government often works hand-in-hand The bizarre irony is that this condition is a core tenet of Fascism, which is something the "woke" anti-free-speechists claim to be fighting against.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what's more civil than peacefully protesting?
Radical anti-abortionists also harass and intimidate people (while "peacefully" protesting,) bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. That's probably what mc32 is referring to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Wrong place” in my comment meant you were at the rally and went along with it. At the point you’re storming a federal building, you should know you’re breaking all manner of laws.
How can you storm a building when the police are holding the door open for you and ushering you in?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Radical anti-abortionists also harass and intimidate people (while "peacefully" protesting,) bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors. That's probably what mc32 is referring to.
how did you get "bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors" from "camp out at abortion clinics"?
edit: but apparently I misinterpreted the comment so mea culpa, my bar for "radical" is different than mc32's.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What consequences should there be for exercising the right to free speech? What say aclu?
well for example there is no law against standing in a public square, be it physical or virtual, and screaming racial epithets. The government cannot forbid it, and within certain limitations (eg "disruption of the peace") they cannot stop someone from doing it with law or force. It is free and protected speech, albeit abhorrent. However there is no law against our hypothetical racist being uninvited from the opening…
It boils down to this: if you think wrongly you aren't allowed to speak. We have all been down this rabbit hole before, none of this is new, it never works out well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>When in our history... Before the masses were corralled into walled gardens. If a free and open Internet was a threat to gatekeepers, walled gardens are the solution. You can say anything you want on their platforms, as long as it adheres to the party's content guidelines. The gate-kept illusion of freedom is arguably more toxic, because it normalizes the curated garden of propagandized views. Yes, you have more opt…
Anyone can easily obtain various forms of anonymous free hosting at the present. What some people don’t seem to understand about the first amendment is that while the government is obligated to not stop you from publishing, no private party is obligated to assist you.