Comment Re: Morons (Score 1) 172
There's nothing in 230 that could be "enforced" here.
There's nothing in 230 that could be "enforced" here.
Is your problem that the Twitter staffer's voice is too loud? Twitter is definitely American and given the US has decided corporations have Free Speech....
BTW your straw man is bad; I don't give a shit who gets fact checked and think any "public official" using media should be subject to fact checking.
For what
If you think the whole "platform" vs "publisher" thing is real, I guess we're done here because I'm not gonna bother with that much crazy.
Citizens? It's a pretty core part of the First Amendment that people can argue with "officials", I don't think there's even a requirement that they're citizens. Hence, "more speech".
Besides, there was no public policy in that Twitter rant.
Trump can try and prove a libel case if he thinks there is one, that would be entertaining.
What Twitter did was "more speech" which is what ALL the First Amendment absolutist cheerleaders have been ranting is the solution to "bad speech" forever.
If your problem is that a nameless Twitter moderator is more credible than the President of the United States of America, then that would be a problem for the USA, not Twitter.
So let me see if I understand?
Narrator: He doesn't.
This is literally what Google do on Youtube... all the companies have to do is submit a sample to Content ID.
It's not perfect, in either direction, but it's not like the big players can't try to stay on the right side of the law.
I don't think they're really talking about Youtube, but if they are, they deserve all the derision being piled on here.
If Comcast doesn't get to decide what happens with it's infrastructure, then how do they own them? This is only at the stage of bluster and point scoring, but if the government actually "did something" then how would that not be taking ownership? And who are the government if not the representatives of the people (workers)?
You can take a purist view if you like, but please go ahead and show me how anywhere is a pure capitalist society. Just about all of the west are social democracies to some extent, albeit the US is the least social of the lot.
Not sure where y'all are getting socialism from.
Comcast provides a router, which unless disabled creates a new hotspot that any of their paying customers can access in addition to your own home wireless network.
Senate has said "gee Comcast, you really have the density in your coverage to give good access to the kids who are supposed to be using the internet for school some level of access if they have none or sub-par".
This.. right here... is socialism.
Senate says "show us the things that a kid who is getting free access can do that would disrupt your customers' experiences that a paying user doing the same thing wouldn't?"
This is too; I have teach a few senators how network contention works for free because....?
(FWIW my two local colleges have increased out door wireless coverage and encouraged folks to come and sit in their car and use portable devices while connected, and the local school board is sending around buses with i'm guessing several cell-based hotspots and covering areas for 4-5 hours per day in large parking areas to do the same for k-12 students who have no access or no high speed access - good part of my county is somewhat rural)
Excellent; colleges tend to have fat commercial links that they couldn't possibly fill with the WiFi bandwidth available from the carpark. Doesn't really apply to domestic broadband though...
Cool cool, you've registered as never to be granted a donor organ, right? Or when you say "believe" you're a bit loose with terminology?
That's unrestrained socialism, which I would agree is bad, but only as bad as unrestrained capitalism.
The very idea that I'm on Comcast's side in an argument makes me throw up in my mouth a bit.
Way to make socialism look like a bad idea you bunch of jackasses.
If this was for poor children to get to school then you could be handing out access passes to schools with reasonable limits to make sure you don't degrade the service down to unusable levels.
No, let's just pretend teh tubes can take endless streaming upload with no degradation and look like heroes of the downtrodden. RAH RAH RAH!
If you need an email for a site you
Has to really be a throwaway site though, or anyone can do a password reset to the email address you used; or you can use a really long/random email address and the odds of someone finding it approach zero but I don't warranty that approach
You can just create aliases on your hotmail account... and it supports the gmail style + aliases as well.
So you make "myspamtrap@outlook.com" or whatever as an alias to your actual hotmail account, then give myspamtrap+dumpsterfire@outlook.com as your email address to dumpsterfire.com
Gives you both and you can just abandon the myspamtrap alias if you win too much spam, by filtering emails to that alias to spam (in case you want to do a password reset on one of these sites....)
I'm not ignoring it at all, I think the level of warning for side-loading things into the device that holds the keys to your banking (for most people) is pretty fucking lightweight, and if it's all too scary then you shouldn't be doing it because you're not in a position to judge the risk or take appropriate mitigations.
You are in a maze of little twisting passages, all alike.
