Or, alternatively, you're a moron who is talking out of your ass.

There exist legal limitations on freedom of speech. And just because a group wraps itself up in the first amendment doesn't make it sincere.

I have heard entities say "hey, it's our right to boycott", only to say that if someone boycotts them their freedom of speech is being endangered. They don't apply the same standard, because somehow it's different.

Because humans are irrational and self serving.

Like your entire post.

If American want to keep shooting one another, I don't give a crap.

Majorities are big, minorities are small ...

So, by convention (not by rule AFAIK), we have vast majorities and small/tiny minorities.

Vast implies big or far reaching. But, oddly, you can have a vast emptiness ... which is a whole lotta nothin'.

For some real fun, google for how many times you can use "had" in a sentence and still have it be correct. Or that sentence made purely out of the word buffalo.

Those will really hurt. ;-)

Don't worry about that ... at that point the machines will just take over and wipe is out anyway. ;-)

"If any reporter adds -gate to a scandal, it means the scandal isn't worth mentioning"

Equivalent? No.

But the question (for which I don't pose an answer) is "do we accept there are valid limitations on free speech, and if so what defines that?"

Some entities are awfully quick to cite freedom of speech, and then just as quick to deny it from others.

So that "principled" stance is often self-serving bullshit.

Because simple human minds love being part of a group. And especially having others who they can exclude from it, so they can feel superior. Even if their accomplishment for belonging to this group is close to or identical to zero.

For reference, see any xenophobic rhetoric.

In their complaint, they claim that a State Department agency called the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) violated their first amendment right to free speech by telling Defense Distributed that it couldn't publish a 3-D printable file for its one-shot plastic pistol known as the Liberator, along with a collection of other printable gun parts, on its website.

So, just as a hypothetical ... would Defense Distributed support someone publishing the names, addresses, SSNs, names of children and the schools they attend for the members of Defense Distributed?

Or is their robust defense of freedom of speech limited solely to commercial activities? Might they even suggest that not all information falls under freedom of speech or serves the public good?

As often as not, corporations make what they claim is a principled stand, which really amounts to "Yarg, we want to make money".

Yet a simple little piece of metal, sufficiently accelerated, can cure that.

Non-black people are attacked by police every day.

Really? You see any riot police in paramilitary gear in the below pictures? Any white "thugs" getting shot in the back while running away? Hell, if you're white, you don't even have to run away. White guys have walked into movie theaters armed like Rambo and murdered a bunch of people in cold blood and the police take them alive and make sure they don't bump their head on the cruiser door when placing them in the back seat.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelli...

https://www.google.com/search?...

You can not possibly believe that interactions between police and white people are anything like interactions between police and black people or hispanic people. Let me ask you this: You hear about any white people who have been shot and killed in police custody with their hands handcuffed behind their back?

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_new...

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/in...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/vid...

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...

I very rarely complain that a story doesn't belong on Slashdot, but this time I will, because this is probably the least Slashdot-worthy story I've seen yet.

This is not news for nerds. This does not matter.

Sadly, no, I don't think we can.

-gate has apparently become cultural shorthand for or "scandal". Some people probably don't even know the origins of it any more.

I fear it's cromulency is no longer up for debate, even if it doesn't embiggen the language.

I think we're stuck with at this point.

That's an interesting finding of facts on your part - can you cite some established evidence?

Yes, the police report made by the arresting officer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

"According to the charging documents submitted by the Baltimore police,[27] at 8:39 a.m, Lieutenant Brian W. Rice, Officer Edward Nero, and Officer Garrett E. Miller were patrolling on bicycles and "made eye contact" with Gray,[24][28][29"

He was stopped because he was a well known criminal hanging out in a high-crime area who took off running as soon as he saw the police and wouldn't stop when asked to.

Do you blame him for running? Freddie Gray was not a suspect in a crime. He was not seen doing anything illegal. He was not found to be engaged in any illegal activity. He fucking made eye contact. He did not show sufficient humility in the face of police presence by casting his eyes downward as young black men are supposed to.

Motherfucker, you've got big white militia assholes carrying automatic weapons and drawing down on Federal officers and the cops are polite and careful not to hurt their delicate feels. A young black man makes eye contact and he's sent to the morgue. You think these guys ever have to worry about "making eye contact" with law enforcement?

http://www.capitolhillblue.com...

Wake the fuck up.

Like doing what you're (legally) supposed to do has ever shielded an employee from getting fired...

Overengineered designs come from people who don't have the experience of having to maintain an older product. The kids out of college are smart and fun to work with, but between the overengineering and their difficulty in perceiving fads from the frameworks that will endure, I find I'd rather not work with them until they have a few more years under their belt.