801–810 of 872 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cherry pick all you want, your thoughts are more propaganda than original.
You've said nothing but diversionary conservative talking points. You can't refute anyone's point, you're only able to muddy the water with willful ignorance.
Reality is hard to face, but it gets harder the longer you wait.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
How is this a guided tour by any stretch of the imagination? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvJvLIXcuc0
You choose not to see how hyperbolic MSM's coverage of the whole thing has been.
I weep for how many of you have been blinded by your own flavor of propaganda, while you coyly act as though "only the _other side_ could fall for that!"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wasn't their goal to stop the handover of power to Biden? Weren't they using force to achieve that goal by attacking the capitol building to stop congress from being able to proceed? How is that not an attempt to end democracy. An insurrection. The ringleaders seemed to be well aware that the objective was to invalidate the election and keep trump president. How is that not an insurrection?
Leaving aside the fact that these people believe democracy had already ended, and that they saw themselves as attempting to save democracy, how does this plan actually work ? Do they just sit in the capitol and declare Trump king? Maybe hold congress members hostage? Who in the federal government or military is going to go along with that? I just don't see it as a realistic threat to our system of government.
It's pretty wild to see the mass denial of hyperbole... Like folks, do you have any idea what would happen if people really wanted to overthrow the government? You'd be kidnapped before you know what happened.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_United_States_presidentia... Here ya go - seems like that's incorrect.
Wikipedia articles about partisan US politics are often incorrect.
After the mid-terms, any Section 230 protection these companies have is going bye-bye. Any kind of active moderation of perfectly legal speech through 'terms of service'/'community standards' will remove any common-carrier liability shield. Actions like this have turned this into political red meat for some. These companies really need to learn how to read the room. Ratcheting downward the ability of people to freely…
That is the wrong solution. The problem isn't people making content decisions, it's market concentration. They have too much market power and it lets them get away with too much hamfisted behavior without losing users. They've already gone far enough for the market to start to solve this. Rumble and Gettr and whatever else are gaining users. But it's producing an ideological split which is pretty dangerous. The other…
There's no shortage of people trying to make these platforms but the problem is free-speech oriented sites get deplatformed. "Build your own hosting company!", "Build your own mobile operating system!", "Build your own payment processor!", etc, etc. A small handful of tech and payment companies can veto any website or app.
It's like the old days of broadcast television where if your show was too controversial for ABC, CBS, or NBC it didn't get on TV, period.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Canada you get arrested for peacefully protesting: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-freedom-convoy-protest-a... Note all the attempts in the article to paint them as "armed" and "extremists". There was no violence, no destruction of property. It was a legal demonstration until it was made illegal by invoking the Emergencies act. And this use of the law in my opinion was an abuse as it clearly is for terrorist t…
Blaring horns and blasting music continuously through the night and day, keeping thousands of people from sleeping is not "peaceful" nor legal. Blocking a nation's highways and borders for weeks is not legal. People screamed blue-bloody-murder when BLM and Occupy protesters chained themselves to barrels across interstates, disrupting traffic for an hour or two...but the Canadian government tolerates a complete shutdo…
The Canadian truckers picked up the trash. I never saw a cleaner protest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fair. Instructions on drinking bleach might cause others to be harmed. This is different because nobody has ever come to harm because of this. I'd imagine if people believed this, there would have been some kind of violence on say, January 6th the day of the insurrection-- sorry, inauguration. Please let me know if you know how to fix this unfortunate typo.
A similar claim of "clear and present danger" was used in 1919 to prosecute anti-war protestors for handing out pamphlets which advocated draft resistance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States While there is certainly a case for criminalizing direct prompts to imminent violence, attaching consequentialism to ideas is a very slippery slope, given enough creative hermeneutics by whoever currently wiel…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Why not? Electricity is deemed a common utility and a regulated, granted natural monopoly - one considered a necessary requirement for all citizens and organizations. Video streaming is not a monopoly, and no number of bad faith arguments about popularity or awareness in consumer headspace change the fact that there are a number easily accessible competitors.
Pray tell, what are those YouTube competitors with non-negligible market share? I'd love to move there and find all my favourite channels (or at least some chunk of them) posting their videos there.
Microsoft, Apple, Spotify, Netflix, etc. + VC money, all have the money and means to compete directly with YouTube if they choose.
The market for “I want to watch Trump claim he stole the election without a disclaimer in the description” might not be that huge. As others have pointed out, creating news about election misinformation is still no problem on YT provided it’s explained as misinformation and not just provided without context.
Also, these content providers can self-host their video content and promote their content as they see fit.
You have to decide if bookmarking the sites of your favorite content providers is a better option than accepting YT’s content guidelines.
But you don’t get to demand that YT host whatever content suits your views. They can curate their platform as they see fit and you can consume it or not as you see fit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It is more of a monopoly than Standard Oil was in terms of market share. Again, no number of bad faith arguments about popularity make it a monopoly. Standard oil was the only accessible supplier in the market in many places. The video streaming and hosting market has many easily accessible suppliers wherever there is internet access. >The government can regulate monopolies for any reason. Whether or not the governm…
It's not about hosting. Anybody can host. The issue is discovery. You host somewhere else and YouTube isn't going to surface your video to their users, and neither is Google since they're the same company. This isn't a problem if there are dozens of video hosting services or search engines that all have equal market share, but there aren't.
Private companies are free to curate their content as they see fit and you can choose to consume it or not.
These independent content creators and journalists can all self host.
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean that every view gets maximum amplification on private networks. It means that the government won’t take steps to repress the speech, which they aren’t.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are your sources that elections are rigged in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Switzerland, New Zealand, Austria, Ireland, Japan, Taiwan, Czech Republic?
If they were actually rigged, do you honestly believe there would be a mainstream (government approved) source saying that? There are plenty of sources saying that, of course, just none you would believe. So it's really a rather unfalsifiable position innit? "The election isn't rigged, and anyone saying it is is a conspiracy theorist. But please post a source saying it's rigged."