|
Kwyjibo
Stranger

Registered: 07/31/18
Posts: 1,276
Loc: California
Last seen: 37 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28128613 - 01/06/23 11:54 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Kwyjibo said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: If I start a website to discuss cute pets, I should probably have a right to censor content that isn't about cute pets.
Then why don't you believe social media companies have the same right to choose what is on their platform?
I do believe it. But I also believe the government shouldn't have the right to coerce platforms to censor content.
It's so weird that everyone here is defending censorship, and saying I'm the one who hates free speech.
So, just to be clear, if Facebook decides that they want to delete a post it's ok for them to do it and it's not censorship?
|
Kryptos
Stranger

Registered: 11/01/14
Posts: 12,848
Last seen: 24 minutes, 13 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kwyjibo]
#28128678 - 01/07/23 12:42 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Depends, is the post on the topic of faces integrating with books?
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,455
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 7 hours, 8 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28128788 - 01/07/23 03:26 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
SirTripAlot said: But that's precisely what you want the government to enact against social media companies.
???
I don't want Social Media Platforms to censor content.
Most of us don't think what is being discussed here is censorship. Censorship is forced; it's mandatory. All you are talking about is some degree of coercion, that falls well short of censorship, because Twitter made a decision. They could have decided either way. Nobody was going to prison or getting shut down.
Private media is a completely different concept from state media.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods]
#28128819 - 01/07/23 05:12 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: Compelled speech is unambiguously a violation of the first amendment.
I've said before, I don't think censoring existing content is compelled speech, I think it's censorship.
I'm for power of the people to speak over than power of the corporation to censor.
I think democrats are stupid for arguing in favor of censorship.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kwyjibo] 1
#28128821 - 01/07/23 05:13 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kwyjibo said: So, just to be clear, if Facebook decides that they want to delete a post it's ok for them to do it and it's not censorship?
It is ok for Facebook to delete a post today, but I think that is censorship.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Brian Jones] 1
#28128826 - 01/07/23 05:20 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Brian Jones said: Most of us don't think what is being discussed here is censorship. Censorship is forced; it's mandatory. All you are talking about is some degree of coercion, that falls well short of censorship, because Twitter made a decision.
At least we agree there was a degree of government coercion, as admitted by a Twitter executive who said "...government partners are becoming more aggressive on attribution and reporting on it. I'm going to go ahead with suspension and marking the domain as UNSAFE."
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 34 minutes, 36 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28128850 - 01/07/23 06:06 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
It is censorship. Twitter has a first amendment right to censor pretty much as it sees fit. Compelling them to platform material that violates rules or violates the whim of the CEO is a blatant violation of their rights. The government can’t do that. You’re just gonna have to deal with it.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Sulfurshelfsean
Defender of Cubes


Registered: 07/29/10
Posts: 4,245
Last seen: 5 hours, 5 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods]
#28128860 - 01/07/23 06:16 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
koods said: And if they don’t you want the government to shut them down?
Then they don't silence people.
It’s ok for the government to silence everyone who uses a social media site, but not ok for a social media site to silence speech that violates its terms of use?
This is insane logic
Yeah he's gone of the deep end at this point. Completely ingsoc contradictory nonsense.
--------------------
   Everything is better when it is done ON TOP OF A MOUNTAIN!
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 18,032
Last seen: 5 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03]
#28128871 - 01/07/23 06:36 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I'm for power of the people to speak over than power of the corporation to censor.
The people largely determine what works for a company. Especially one dependent on ad revenue. No people, no revenue, no company.
A single entity with 44bn is not "the people" and that lesson is landing hard
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
Kizzle
Misanthrope


Registered: 08/30/11
Posts: 9,866
Last seen: 2 months, 9 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kickle]
#28128912 - 01/07/23 07:24 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
At least we agree there was a degree of government coercion, as admitted by a Twitter executive who said "...government partners are becoming more aggressive on attribution and reporting on it. I'm going to go ahead with suspension and marking the domain as UNSAFE."
What threat did the government make against Twitter if it didn't suspend the account?
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 107,128
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 34 minutes, 36 seconds
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kizzle]
#28128935 - 01/07/23 07:53 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
0% they are forcing or threatening Twitter over content moderation. I’ve seen plenty of these emails that show Twitter didn’t always do what the FBI suggested.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,455
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 7 hours, 8 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods]
#28128952 - 01/07/23 08:14 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
The impression that I get is that Musk didn't create more free speech, but changed which side is getting suppressed.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
Kickle
Wanderer



Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 18,032
Last seen: 5 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Brian Jones] 1
#28128963 - 01/07/23 08:28 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, his company, his choice to try. But losing money like he is, doesn't seem like he's seeing the market this time.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
shivas.wisdom
בּ



Registered: 02/19/09
Posts: 13,487
Loc: Turtle Island
Last seen: 2 hours, 54 minutes
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#28128987 - 01/07/23 08:46 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: I didn't frame your argument as "poo poo head remarks"; it was a good summary and I even said "Exactly". I framed your calling me a liar as a poo poo head remark.
Now, I can do like you and call you a liar for saying I framed your arguments "poo poo head remarks", or I can do like an adult and say you clearly misinterpreted me. I'll take the latter approach.
[...]
Let me quote your own post:
Quote:
I feel the simplest way to illustrate this distinction is by pointing out that the Supreme Court recommended criminal obscenity trials as the preferable method of regulation...
What's the difference between criminal and illegal?
[...]
You left out the latter part of that paragraph: "...government partners are becoming more aggressive on attribution and reporting on it. I'm going to go ahead with suspension and marking the domain as UNSAFE."
He literally said his reason for censoring was government aggression.
(1) I didn't call you a liar - I showed your interpretation of the Supreme Court decision was wrong, and asked "was your misinterpretation the result of ignorance of the material, or an intentional lie?"
(2) I asked you to quote the part of the decision that stated "The Government can't censor unless they show content is illegal" - do you think I'm a Supreme Court judge? I referred to the mention of criminal obscenity trials to counter your summary that "The US Supreme Court did indeed reverse the decision of the Rhode Island Supreme Court that it was ok to censor content." It was intended to show how censorship is still allowed by the courts, so long as procedural safeguards are included in the censorship process. Please quote the section of the decision you believe supports your summary. (3) He literally meant the words he wrote, not your interpretation that he meant he was coerced. Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan had aggrieved parties because they literally sued the government, claiming coercion. Why has no one from Twitter sued the government for coercion?
--------------------
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 67,515
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#28129147 - 01/07/23 11:21 AM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: The threats to Elon Musk to censor more or face punishment far exceeds what the 1963 Court found to be unconstitutional coercion to censor.
What threats are those, exactly?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kickle] 1
#28129909 - 01/07/23 09:32 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kickle said: The people largely determine what works for a company. Especially one dependent on ad revenue. No people, no revenue, no company.
Twitter has plenty of users since Elon took over. He's gotten a ton of bad press for unsilencing conservative voices. Some people can't handle free speech, so they call it "compelled speech", even though Twitter is unsilencing them voluntarily.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Kizzle]
#28129912 - 01/07/23 09:37 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Kizzle said: What threat did the government make against Twitter if it didn't suspend the account?
I don't know what threat the government made that caused Twitter to feel compelled to censor InfoBRICS, but clearly it scared them enough to violate their 'town square' vision.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: koods] 1
#28129916 - 01/07/23 09:40 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: 0% they are forcing or threatening Twitter over content moderation. I’ve seen plenty of these emails that show Twitter didn’t always do what the FBI suggested.
I guess you missed the one where they censored InfoBRICS due to government intimidation. That changes the odds to 100%.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
ballsalsa
Universally Loathed and Reviled



Registered: 03/11/15
Posts: 22,490
Loc: Foreign Lands
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: Falcon91Wolvrn03] 1
#28129920 - 01/07/23 09:44 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: Some people can't handle free speech, so they call it "compelled speech", even though Twitter is unsilencing them voluntarily.
That is a disgusting mischaracterization. Either quote the person(s) you're referring to or admit that you just made that up.
--------------------
Like cannabis topics? Read my cannabis blog here
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 8 months, 8 days
|
Re: Turns out DHS IS working with private companies to censor speech! [Re: shivas.wisdom]
#28129931 - 01/07/23 09:59 PM (1 year, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: (1) I didn't call you a liar - I showed your interpretation of the Supreme Court decision was wrong, and asked "was your misinterpretation the result of ignorance of the material, or an intentional lie?"
And I showed my interpretation right, so it's not ignorance, and therefore you called me a liar.
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: (2) I asked you to quote the part of the decision that stated "The Government can't censor unless they show content is illegal"
Once again, YOU quoted the part that said the Government can't censor unless they show the content is criminal. What's the difference between illegal and criminal?
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: (3) He literally meant the words he wrote, not your interpretation that he meant he was coerced.
I used the same word as he did - aggressive.
Quote:
shivas.wisdom said: Bantam Books, Inc. v. Sullivan had aggrieved parties because they literally sued the government, claiming coercion. Why has no one from Twitter sued the government for coercion?
Twitter's already finding out what happens when you go against the government. Do they dare take it to the next level, like what Trump tried to do about Biden firing Shokin? That didn't work out too well for Trump.
As Chuck Schumer said, "Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you."
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
|