This is a money grab and people need to resist it. Large companies desperately want to transition everyone over to a rental society where you don't own anything. They are doing so for purely greedy reasons. There is no benefit to society from this model.
You mean like what Democrat states did during the 2020 election against Trump?
https://www.foxbusiness.com/te...
Waiting to see you condemn this behavior against Trump as your surely not a hypocrite.
Welcome to the real world, youâ(TM)ve spent years making âoecontentâ, your not actually a special snowflake after all. Your actually more like a plumber, carpenter or a coder who makes content that others consumer. People consume your content, rate it on the quality and recommend it to others based on their experience. You just might get reduced to a plebe like the rubes and normal people.
This is gas lighting being pushed to for a political agenda. The only people buying this are the likes are the likes of CNN and the mentally ill.
Seriously, who would ever buy this gun? No law enforcement agency would ever accept the risk of this, especially after the events of 2020. Can you imagine someone of âoedefund the policeâ mantra working on the equations for the ethics of this? Certainly you local police department can, and they would never agree to use such a gun, and you can rest assured legal action would ensue to ensure that they donâ(TM)t.
The military would never touch something like this, who gets the vote on ethics committee? It would be a cold day in hell before the government ever uses something like this. That leaves civilians to buy something like this. How are you ever going to convince a civilian to willingly purchase something that will second guess their ethics?
Some people seem to think itâ(TM)s racist to interfere in crimes considered by BIPOC, others think itâ(TM)s racist to even consider the question. Who gets to make the ethics call for the equations? Is it okay to shoot or not someone based on identity politics? The lawyers would have a field day and anyone involved in the project would be sued and quite possibly prosecuted. Whether you make the decision to shoot or not to shoot, lives can or will be lost. Remember the vast majority of gun use is defensive to prevent a crime and save lives.
This is an epically bad idea.
They are making a premise that the thing they disagree with politically is incorrect. They fail to consider the possibility that they are incorrect and that the âmisinformationâ(TM) is in fact accurate. Simply put they are pushing a political agenda instead of facts, one that fails once they get out a tightly controlled environment.
They had terrible logic, thatâ(TM)s how you get accused of redlining and being racist.
Story is terrible, I canâ(TM)t quite figure out whatâ(TM)s going on. The article that is linked to takes too long to get to the point.
However since itâ(TM)s 2021 itâ(TM)s probably a safe bet that a student has discovered that their admission status has far more to do with identity politics than it does with merit. A lot of colleges and universities now have literally put these criteria into formulas that give you points based on a range of factors that are outside of your control such as race, sex and whether or not your parent was an alumni.
Were back to Jim Crow politics for college admissions with merit having only a limited influence on who gets in. You canâ(TM)t solve past discrimination with more discrimination. Itâ(TM)s like fighting a flood by pouring in more water. Before the fight fire with fire analogies come in, firefighters are extremely careful about doing prescribed burns in very narrow use cases, lots of preparation is done ahead of time, they are standing by to limit the scope and even they still often end up out of control.
I think we can put to bed the absurd lie that you can just build your own services now.
N1H1 origin came from Mexico
Spanish flu originated in China.
Amazingly every one of their vendors, even their lawyers, deplatformed them in the same 24 hour period - over the weekend. This just happened to be the 24 hour period after it made the news that Trump was joining.
In the real world Parler being deplatformed had everything to do with Trump joining the platform. Let Trump join your platform and your company will itself be deplatformed. It was a blatant demonstration of power to send a political message - Trump will be deplatformed. Your company cannot afford to host Trump.
The claim will never pass muster in a court as the data speaks against it. Exactly zero people involved with the Capital riot had a Parler account. Meanwhile it turns out that the people who were actually involved did their planning on Twitter and Facebook. These same platforms that have been hosting everything from rape threats to physical violence threats and even threats of violence for years.
By their claimed standards Twitter is the company that should have been kicked off of Amazon. The very day Parler was kicked off 'hang Mike Pence' was allowed to trend on Twitter and the CCP and and ayatollah of Iran still had accounts. Deplatforming Parler had nothing to do with violence and everything to do with Trump.
Declared guilty of? The only court that has found Trump guilty of anything is the kangaroo court run by the media. So many people presume all of these things that must be true because they saw or read it in the media and have never seen a correction. When you dig into the details it turns out they can never articulate beyond orange man bad.
How does that change the fact that Amazon literally deplatformed them? Amazon won't even allow them to download their own source code. Being deplatformed is going to be the new disaster recovery scenario.
If they applied their rules equally half the democrats would be banned as well as Beijing Biden and Harris. They don't apply the rules equally, instead choosing to censor under very unequal terms. That's an abuse of power especially when they a monopoly. This is even more so an issue when they have been taking direction from congress (do this or we'll do bad things to you) which is explicitly barred from censoring by the constitution.
So yeah, this is censorship, it's a constitutional rights issue and it's the kind of thing that's leading Twitter to court to be broken up or treated as a utility for abusing their monopoly. Just remember censorship never stops at speech that you don't like, it always invariably expands to cover speakers and speech you like as well.
Trying to be happy is like trying to build a machine for which the only specification is that it should run noiselessly.
