The EU, for example, has no problem with putting 49 individuals, without court case or judicial decision, without any possibility of appeal, on a sanction list, banning them from all financial transactions such as paying their rent.

If you are okay with that, but think the Trump regime, fascism, then you are part of the problem.

When those who oppose freedom of opinion, of speech, of assembly, ... are called out for their repression, by another regime, then I welcome it.

Europe, is wonderful, the EU is a tyrannical construct.

By their actions, shall you know them.

If Software is subject to the same copyright law,
then does this mean, that AI-generated software
is also not subject to copyright?

Interesting implications, if so.

Especially considering that Microsoft allegedly trained copilot
on the Github *private* repositories as well.

Theoretically, by querying an AI trained on confidential data and code,
and asking it to generate using that knowledge, software which is similar
in operation and outputs ... one could "launder" copyrighted code,
into a non licenced but legal, form.

Ahh, the lawyers will love this.

Well, how can the creators of WordPress complain?

They chose to use a licence, which is explicitly created by people who hate the idea of software costing any money.
And as a happy side-effect, allows non-creators to package and distribute it, with added services, without any development or support costs.

Now the courts have upheld, as desired by copy-left, the terms of the licence, preventing measures to block the downstream parasites.

Open-source slavery!

But all of this is a choice. If they don't like it, then they can fork and change the licence.

Shrug.

But where is the Event DB?

Stallman in person, is an utter ass. Arrogant to the point of self-parody.

Both on a personal "human" level, and on an intellectual one.
Maybe "evangelising" is a great choice of words, since it involves religious fervour.

Discussion, debate and nuanced consideration of alternative viewpoints?
Nah.

Aggressive re-statements of opinion, as "fact".
Denigration of those holding opposing views.
Partisan positions on all issues.

Stallman is simply a product of the WEIRD mindset, and anyone
surprised at his interactions with people he perceives as "lower"
in his hierarchy, including women, is ignoring unpleasant truths.

Self-appointed Saviours: follow at your peril.

That the HR people who revel in these new AI systems,
including the ability to silently, legally, eliminate all the "non mainstream"
candidates, including those who are older, ...
will inevitably be fired based on the recommendations of the same systems, ...
brings a smile to my face.

"democratic institutions at both the political and industrial level"

From Marxists? Citation very much needed.
You lie, sir.

For example, do you claim that Marxists or Socialists,
believe in *multiple* unions?

Or was it just the "People's Union" as an aspect of The Party?

Marxism is fundamentally opposed to Democracy.

It is a tyranny.

You fundamentally miss the point.

You assume that an authority, "allows" you to speak.

That a platform will be "given" to you.

A privilege. Which can be removed for "naughty" behavior.

Value judgements, performed by a legitimate authority upon a subservient subject.

Look at you, willing peasant.
Kneeler.

Faced with those, with different views.
Ridiculous, abhorrent, trivial, mocking, insightful, provocative, ...

What do you do?

You call them scum.
Belittle them. Mock them.
Ban them.

Well, it did not work against the National Socialists, nor against the Bolsheviks.

Should you really be a liberal, or a progressive, then you would appeal to reason, to debate.

You would seek to convert those in the dark, to your light.

But you don't.

So you are no liberal.

Why should then you have the right to speak, when you deny it to others?

Rights are indisputable, and they include the Rights to think, speak and listen.

Spoken like a True Anonymous Coward.

You believe that you have a right to speak,
and that others do not.

Bad ideas should be countered by firm reason and discussion, ... in the light.

Not allowed to fester in the dark.

How are people okay with this?

Would you accept the Phone Company interrupting your call, when they disliked your topic?
How about books being banned, because they could "cause misinformation"?

It looks like a self-appointed right to control discussion and blatant, biased election influence.

Is a bad thing "okay" when it is done by the "right people" or for the "right reasons"?

Allowing the censorship of discussions, may be legal for private companies, but
is questionable when it comes to elections.

When did Enlightenment values, become inconvenient, to people who probably think
themselves as "Liberal"!?

Emotive, dishonest piece.

Immigrants are those who have applied for, received and are present in a country by due process, on for example a visa.

Asylum seekers are those who present themselves promptly upon arrival and seek (I.e. ask for), asylum due to certain criteria. And who are evaluated by those criteria. Which do not include: "my country is poor".

People who do not fall into those categories, who do not (because they cannot) pay tax, and who have not been permitted to be there ... are illegal immigrants. Especially when they have evaded detection, not claimed asylum, and sadly, sometimes committed crimes.

So what the author and in this case, the ACLU, are claiming, is that there are certain categories of people, who are not citizens, who are *above* and *exempt* from the law.

A spectacular claim.

There has existed, for a long time, the ACM code of ethics.
Copies abound online.

It is sound, rational and expresses well: the Ethos of Engineering.

Should anyone propose a Code of Conduct, say:
        "Great Idea! Let's use the ACM one!"

IF in response, you hear:
        "No! You have to use ours",
then you *know* that you face manipulation, by the politically motivated.

Reject them!

Otherwise, nothing you do or say will be sufficient to appease them.
They seek obedience. Dominion.

Accepting their Code of Conduct, gives them power over you,
which they *will* yield. "Ethical engineers would agree to X, Y, Z, ..."

An open-ended, never ending litany of complaint and demand.

Ultimately, you will have no-one else to blame, but yourself.

Reject the politicization of engineering.
Defend the Enlightenment.

ACM, for the win.

Would all the EU apologists, remainers, Statists and anti-border fanatics like to say something?

Anything?
Anyone?

The EU which they love, which they idolize,
keeps restricting freedoms, keeps removing rights,
increasing costs, increasing regulations,
and never, ever causing the rich, powerful and corrupt any problems.

But as a Liberal, should I say anything, anything against the EU, I am smeared as a right winger.

Authoritarian Fascism, defended and supported by the Left, the Right and
the new Aristocratic Elite.

Pick Up That Can!

Time to go all in. Just region lock ... everything.

People from RegionX, can only see content from RegionX.

Forever cementing the most powerful companies and organisations, in each RegionX.

No share space. No common Internet. Small, walled, guard-towered, soulless gardens.
For Safety. And think of the Children.

This is the future ... balkanization of ... Everything.

Does anyone believe that this is the end of Regulation?
All traffic tracked.
All users identified.
READING Content and downloading "bad words" criminalised.
All copyright of "authorised" (sanctioned) media protected harshly.
No free speech.
No allowance to create or use your own comment solution (Dissenter).

Wonderful? Well, they are not finished.

"Internet Tax". "Internet Privilege Suspension". "Lifelong Block".

Oh! What a brave new world!