Twitter Hides POTUS Tweet

InsolentGaylord said:
How? I mean it's true you guys fearmonger and want something done to stop the ideological brainwashing going on, and then you turn around and go "NO WE DON'T WANT IT WE WANT THINGS TO STAY THIS WAY FOREVER" when a solution comes.

I guess you just like stressing out and being a whiny sack of shit.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it's not the best solution, my guy.

In order to get rid of the SJWs, we shall not screw the internet entirely, but we need a vast chain of political movements that disapprove of that ideology and eventually boot it out.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Agree
Reactions: Kot Johansson and The Last Stand
Donald Trump cleaning and sweeping up the internet as Janny in Chief, circa 2020
1590771007774.png

1590770761595.png
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Lizard Machine Bugs, Aberforth, Knyttet and 36 others
Being mad at Trump is only being mad at one part of the problem. Twitter has been continuously been poking at Trump thinking they were invulnerable. Section 230 disappearing would shutter both KF and Twitter overnight. Repealing/revoking/changing 230 would be a fucking disaster for the internet at large, and while I think Twitter would have brought it upon itself, it's not something anyone should be wanting, whether you're on the left or right.

Sure, I want Twitter to disappear, too. But I don't want KF or any other site to go down with them.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Marvin, axfaxf, Yotsubaaa and 31 others
InsolentGaylord said:
How? I mean it's true you guys fearmonger and want something done to stop the ideological brainwashing going on, and then you turn around and go "NO WE DON'T WANT IT WE WANT THINGS TO STAY THIS WAY FOREVER" when a solution comes.

I guess you just like stressing out and being a whiny sack of shit.
Click to expand...

Did you read the thread?
 
Kornheiser said:
That’s not going to happen with the House being orange man bad mode right now.
Click to expand...

That's just it. There's a bipartisan effort to nuke 230, or twist it into something that only protects Google et all and wouldn't protect the Farms, 8ch, etc. If the DNC's corporate overlords demand it, they very well could decide to let Trump have his way and nuke the damned thing.
 
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Kot Johansson
Radical Goodspeed said:
It was all fun and games until the God-Emperor's tard fit affected you, eh?

The order wont stand up in court.
Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with the order. It asks the FCC and pals to look at Twitter and decide if they still qualify as a platform and get the protections. This falls well within the powers of the executive. The problem is the push to repeal section 230.
 
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Return of the Freaker, rotollo, Not Really Here and 1 other person
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Kot Johansson, HanSolo and HTTP Error 404
LiarTranny said:
ITT: we would rather be raped by brown terrorists than have President fight twitter's censorship

Even bernie supporters stand behind firmer behind their cause and want to start a revolution at any cost.

But you are a bunch of cowards who pussied out. Soyboy weak males like you are why the west is falling.
Click to expand...
Okay, how much are you being paid to type this?

Keep fighting the good fight on the Internet in the comfort of your own home.
 
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: WhiteLivesMatter, The Pink Panther, DanteAlighieri and 1 other person
YayLasagna said:
Question, would another 'western' civilization, like say the UK, be an inferior but still stable replacement for some of these sites to move to?
Click to expand...

The UK sends the cops round to people's houses for misgendering. It's a dystopian nightmare. As flawed as the US is it's nowhere near as bad and wouldn't be as bad even if CDA S 230 went away.

OnMoTi said:
I'm fully aware of what 230 is, and I've also read his EO. He's not saying "erase 230." He's saying "remove the protections for places that aren't playing by the rules."
Click to expand...

Reading the text of the Executive Order it's kind of hard to see where this will end up. Like you say it's not as simple as 'abolish CDA S 230, it's more like 'the FTC will look at Tech Companies on the shitlist we created using the Tech Bias Reporting tool and shall consider whether to strip them of their CDA S 230 protection'.

It seems like the usual suspects - Twitter, Facebook and Youtube - will all be on the shitlist. They also know they're on the shitlist and will presumably be very keen to get off it. So all they might well back down, at least until the election. Or they might decide to accelerate to ramming speed against the USS Trump, in which case the FTC which is currently controlled by the GOP could decide to nuke them by removing their CDA S 230 protections.

I think if a site is not significant to be on the shitlist it won't be nailed.

The other thing about the EO is it's not Trump going off half-cocked as he often does. He's clearly got lawyers to write this and fill it with citations so hopefully it won't just get killed off by the courts as his immigration EO 'Muslim ban' did. That had to be rewoked as Presidential proclamation 9645.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/
https://archive.vn/p3yx8

(i) the interaction between subparagraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of section 230, in particular to clarify and determine the circumstances under which a provider of an interactive computer service that restricts access to content in a manner not specifically protected by subparagraph (c)(2)(A) may also not be able to claim protection under subparagraph (c)(1), which merely states that a provider shall not be treated as a publisher or speaker for making third-party content available and does not address the provider’s responsibility for its own editorial decisions;

(ii) the conditions under which an action restricting access to or availability of material is not “taken in good faith” within the meaning of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) of section 230, particularly whether actions can be “taken in good faith” if they are:

(A) deceptive, pretextual, or inconsistent with a provider’s terms of service; or

(B) taken after failing to provide adequate notice, reasoned explanation, or a meaningful opportunity to be heard; and

(iii) any other proposed regulations that the NTIA concludes may be appropriate to advance the policy described in subsection (a) of this section.

Sec. 3. Protecting Federal Taxpayer Dollars from Financing Online Platforms That Restrict Free Speech. (a) The head of each executive department and agency (agency) shall review its agency’s Federal spending on advertising and marketing paid to online platforms. Such review shall include the amount of money spent, the online platforms that receive Federal dollars, and the statutory authorities available to restrict their receipt of advertising dollars.

(b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency shall report its findings to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

(c) The Department of Justice shall review the viewpoint-based speech restrictions imposed by each online platform identified in the report described in subsection (b) of this section and assess whether any online platforms are problematic vehicles for government speech due to viewpoint discrimination, deception to consumers, or other bad practices.

Sec. 4. Federal Review of Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices. (a) It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today, should not restrict protected speech. The Supreme Court has noted that social media sites, as the modern public square, “can provide perhaps the most powerful mechanisms available to a private citizen to make his or her voice heard.” Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S. Ct. 1730, 1737 (2017). Communication through these channels has become important for meaningful participation in American democracy, including to petition elected leaders. These sites are providing an important forum to the public for others to engage in free expression and debate. Cf. PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74, 85-89 (1980).

(b) In May of 2019, the White House launched a Tech Bias Reporting tool to allow Americans to report incidents of online censorship. In just weeks, the White House received over 16,000 complaints of online platforms censoring or otherwise taking action against users based on their political viewpoints. The White House will submit such complaints received to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

(c) The FTC shall consider taking action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, pursuant to section 45 of title 15, United States Code. Such unfair or deceptive acts or practice may include practices by entities covered by section 230 that restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities’ public representations about those practices.

(d) For large online platforms that are vast arenas for public debate, including the social media platform Twitter, the FTC shall also, consistent with its legal authority, consider whether complaints allege violations of law that implicate the policies set forth in section 4(a) of this order. The FTC shall consider developing a report describing such complaints and making the report publicly available, consistent with applicable law.
Click to expand...

tl;dr - wait to see how this pans out. This is not the apocalypse. I think it's more like the US DOJ ruling against Microsoft - it is designed to change behavior, not shut down the company being ruled against.

Those tech companies just got the equivalent of a community guidelines strike and know they must change their behavior or face the broom. It's just in this case the broom is bigger and is wielded by the POTUS and the FTC.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Informative
Reactions: Pina Colada, Coh, Return of the Freaker and 4 others
DanteAlighieri said:
They were all shilling for it you retard.
Click to expand...
Way to only remember a slice of recent history. That only happened during the first push and that can be largely attributed because it was a large social thing so they didn't want to look bad. Then they were all completely silent during the second push which was more then a year later when it actually was repelled, and some like the head of Google at the outright said they were looking to have it repealed.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Syntaxion
nonnewtonian said:
I feel like this is a good time to remind people that Joe Biden also wants to repeal Section 230 because he's pissed at Facebook.

No matter who wins this year's US presidential election, we are about to be saddled with a technologically illiterate leader who wants to take away one of the most fundamental building blocks of the internet because he's mad at social media. People have every reason to be worried.
Click to expand...
I remember the Obama era with the internet killswitch in one of those yearly defense bills, SOPA and PIPA. Obama is considered despite his actions, a smart and knowledgeable person. And he was trying to push this shit and the aftermath of his failures have been devastating to everyone and played a role in getting Trump elected with his internet support. Its gonna get tiresome at some point because Trump is easy to hate but another Obama like figure from the left and assuming the current state of the media and DNC infiltrated activist groups holds, section 230 or whatever will get fucked. Because at the end of the day, they don't mingle with the masses.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Return of the Freaker and rotollo
Hard Toothbrush said:
Holy shit the stream is an amazing trainwreck.

www.youtube.com

mad

https://madattheinternet.com
www.youtube.com www.youtube.com
Click to expand...
Jersh going insane is the best part of this week
SSF2T Old User said:
On the off chance this will work, can someone smart and good with words type out a template that everyone can use? Maybe it'll sink in for these idiots that maybe what they are doing is a VERY BAD idea.
Click to expand...
it would just go into spam if you use a template over and over
 
  • Like
Reactions: Return of the Freaker
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back