That false premise has been put to rest with the deplatforming of Parler.

Your lying. Every word of what you said is false. The entire Russian narrative was a sham.

The only Trump people that got in any trouble over that got in trouble over process crimes. Crimes that deep state people like Comey themselves committed and would have been put in prison over if the law was applied fairly.

That lie is over, you're going to have to come up with a new one.

California doesn't have an income problem, they have a spending problem. Until they can learn to get their spending under control giving them more money will solve nothing.

It's not about the money the government gets. It's about the money the people have taken from them. I've spent a lot of time and known a lot of people in California, they consider Prop 13 to be just about the only check and balance they have against government taxes and waste.

The need to deplatform? The premises that their is ever a need to deplatform needs to be challenged from the very beginning. Who the hell elected that person and made them God? That's why we have rights, to protect us from would be petty tyrants such as that.

I miss the old slashdot where someone who wrote such a thing would have been chased off with pitchforks and torches. It would have happened irrespective of the persons politics and the mantra 'the Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it' would be posted 42 times.

I'm not sorry, but the only times there is a need to deplatform involve terrorism or explicit criminal acts such as those with kids. Political disagreement should never be an acceptable reason to deplatform anyone.

This of course is entirely dependent on the modern redefining of the word misinformation to mean information that I don't like. It's amazing how censorship of information you don't like results in less of it on the platforms that follow your standards.

Meanwhile in the real world where people are not so rabidly partisan and don't update their dictionaries every congressional hearing misinformation is still very much alive and available in the corporate media.

I'm not defending Q-anon, I don't follow them, I'm not associated with them and don't know anyone that's a member. That being said the double standard is enough to make your head spin.

You see Amazon still sells books about the Trump Russian collusion delusion. They do this even though this has been debunked at every point. At this point we even know the entire thing was setup from the get go as a distraction by the Obama white house on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign to distract from her email server controversy.

It's not even a matter of debate at this point as Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe declassified former Director of National Intelligence John Brennan's hand written notes from the meeting documenting their plan.

Brennan's handwritten notes state. 'Cite alleged approval by Hillary Clinton-on 26 July-of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to villify [sic] Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.'

https://thefederalist.com/2020...
https://www.foxnews.com/politi...

Just in case you're curious President Trump just declassified everything about the Russian investigation. Hardly sounds like the actions of someone that is guilty and wants to cover things up.

I have never disputed that this was done by professionals for purposes of espionage. I agree with you on the well known short list (Fancy Bear, Cozy Bear, Naikon, 61398 etc). What was done was almost certainly done by a nation state and frankly risked being declared as an act of war.

If your risking war with a particular action your likely going to try to obfuscate your for plausible deniability. Any nation state capable of putting that hack in place is also going to have the resources and experience to mix and matching code from different groups to achieve the result they wanted. The point being you cannot simply take some code, review it and attribute it to a given group.

How was the code used?
What kind of data was taken?
Where was the data sent, first hop, second hop etc?
What about C&C?

There's a whole range of additional questions that must be answered in order to attribute a hack to someone. The code itself is only one question, and that is the one that has the least value of all as it can and does get stolen and reused. At the end of the day it's all about context and the code without context is worthless.

By your logic if we cut off the NY Times from being able to publish on the Internet were not censoring because they can still print their Newspaper.

Sorry, but this is crap. It's being proposed to believe that a nation state actor was sophisticated enough to pull a supply chain attack like the against the Pentagon et al, but enough to put some misdirection in their code? Does anyone here really think it would be that hard to rip off a bit of code from something to pin it on someone else? Seriously, whoever was behind this probably has people that speak Russian well enough to assist with the code snippets.

You can't tell anything by the code. The code could have come from one entity and been pirated by another! This may well have happened more than once with code coming from multiple entities and cobbled together for a desired result. I think it's a safe bet that if your going through the effort to pull off an attack like this one, your probably going to try to do at least a little bit of obfuscation or misdirection.

Seriously, attribution on attacks like this is non-trivial and not something you can do simply by analyzing code. Credible attribution for something like this comes from good old fashioned detective work. Anything else is nothing more than intellectual dishonesty.

Yes, there are sites you can't reach in China. Most nations block certain sites that they don't like. At least that censorship relatively honest and typically listed as blocked (although they sometimes resort to "technical difficulties").

What's insidious is that the censorship in America is that the censorship is just as broad in scope, however it is innocuous enough that most people don't realize how heavily they are being censored. The censorship here is done by private companies that use a number of techniques to achieve similar results. Here's a few things off the top of my head:

Style guides are used to define how words can appear in stories for news aggregators like the AP, Reuters and NY Times. These style guides enforce progressive values and will literally redefine words to support political purposes. Just last summer the AP changed their definition definition of the word "riot" from something violent to a protest. This only happened after polls showed that riots were hurting the democrats.
https://news.yahoo.com/ap-styl...

Algorithmic ranking to enforce censorship uses a range of techniques to enforce censorship by delisting, shadow banning, deboosting, boosting, content. Modern techniques use social credit scores (borrowed from China) to enforce behavior against a site based not just on the content that it hosts, but the comments it hosts as well as those of the sites that it networks. By doing this they can reduce the pagerank of an entire network of sites concurrently for hosting similar types of content.
https://link.springer.com/arti...

If a site tries to host content that Big Tech doesn't like they will have their pagerank reduced. If they associate with a site that a Big Tech doesn't like they will have their page rank reduced. The effect is to enforce ostracization, with the further enforcement capability of turning off ad revenue as well as search traffic. In the case of Parler where they dared to allow Trump to have an account they deplatformed the entire company - literally.
https://news.yahoo.com/parler-...

Simply put, the grip of big tech over the content is so strong that even the media is beholden to big tech. Do something to upset big tech and they will reduce the traffic to your website, or even make it hard to find with a direct search. For example Google directly interfered in the 2020 election by manipulating the traffic for Breitbart, even when someone directly looked for a Breitbart story with text from that story.
https://www.breitbart.com/tech...

The net impact of the censorship was so effective that it completely killed the Hunter Biden laptop scandal before the election. It was claimed to be fake news and news stories that verified it were censored. The result was fake news stories like the following that came out right before the election:
https://www.reporterherald.com...

It turned out that the laptop was in fact real news and the kid was in fact being investigated by the FBI. This was a legitimate story that was being suppressed for purely political purposes by big tech. Just days after the election the story could no longer be suppressed and it was finally acknowledge as real by the corporate media:
https://apnews.com/article/45e...

By way of point, this story was enough to swing the election. When a poll was done after the election, 1 in 6 Biden voters said they would have voted differently if they had known the full story before the election. When you are directly changing the results of national elections like the presidential race with your censorship it has crossed the line to abusing a monopoly.
https://www.timesfreepress.com...

So yeah, censorship in America is just as broad in scope as in China. The one thing we have going for us is that the enforcement mechanisms are run privately instead of by the government. Big tech even uses actual Chinese censors to perform censorship.
https://nypost.com/2020/10/20/...

By the way, on that laptop from Hunter Biden was correspondence from China coordinating with the Bidens on how to beat Trump in the election for their mutual benefit. They were literally colluding with a foreign power on how to beat the other party - the very thing Trump was accused of doing by the media for years. You could say that laptop story was pretty damn relevant to the election. You would have heard about them if not for big tech censorship. Here's a link directly to the correspondence from Bidens assigned honeypot spy:
https://apelbaum.wordpress.com...

When the decision making behind the weighting it becomes political. Or when politics is used to filter content or drop contracts.

I stand by my statement that the level level of censorship is the same. I concur with your statement about the enforcement mechanisms and that is really all that I can say.

China has made quite clear that they support Biden.
https://www.wbap.com/news/chin...

The Bidens were literally collaborating with China to win the election. These letters came from Hunter Bidens laptop that was seized by the FBI. They were written by his Chinese spy / honeypot.
https://apelbaum.wordpress.com...

Where's your condemnation of the BLM Antifa riots and attempted storming of the White House from last summer then? If you 'forgot' to give one then you can surely do so now.

I'll show you. Political violence is wrong. See that was easy, I don't even have a disclaimer based on who the target or instigator was. If you can't condemn the attempted storming of the White House, or show that you then you are nothing more than a hypocritical liar.

Just remember someone out there is archiving your comments. As well as those of others organizing similiar events for the left. This is a game that has no winners. You really don't want to be going there.