Twitter Hides POTUS Tweet

[CatParty]

http://www.stationgossip.com/2019/07/section-230-is-internets-first.html?m=1

In the digital realm, that freedom is only possible because of a decades-old provision of the Communications Decency Act, known as Section 230. Signed into law by President Bill Clinton, when both Democrats and Republicans were mostly worried about online indecency, it has enabled the internet to flourish as a cultural and economic force.
Widely misunderstood and widely misinterpreted, often by those with political ambitions and agendas, Section 230 is, at its core, about making the internet safe for both innovation and individual free speech. It is the internet's First Amendment—possibly better. And it is increasingly threatened by the illiberal right and the regressive left, both of which are now arguing that Section 230 gives tech industry giants unfair legal protection while enabling political bias and offensive speech.

​

Ending or amending Section 230 wouldn't make life difficult just for Google, Facebook, Twitter, and the rest of today's biggest online platforms. Eroding the law would seriously jeopardize free speech for everyone, particularly marginalized groups whose ideas don't sit easily with the mainstream. It would almost certainly kill upstarts trying to compete with entrenched tech giants. And it would set dangerous precedents, with ripple effects that extend to economic and cultural areas in the U.S. and around the world.

 

[Null]

So how is it any different when Twitter curates information from third parties to conform with its own speech?

Newspapers work on a whitelist, forums operate on a blacklist. You have to be invited by the editor to write for a newspaper. I do not personally sign off on every post here.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

View attachment 1330109

I really hope nobody goes along with this bullshit but you just know there are shitheels in there that will try to get the ball rolling. The fact he even said this is so much more damaging than the actual EO he sent out, even if screaming into Twitter has less legislative power than an EO.

 

[[Redacted]-san]

I'm still baffled as to how Trump is even the president of the US to begin with. He's such a lying fool most of the time. And he says untrue statements on Twitter, and now he's having a temper tantrum just because he gets fact checked on the site. It's just embarrassing to watch...I'll just relax and make more drawings in the meantime.

 

[PowerWomon]

View attachment 1330068

"I give up. I give up on this president, I give up on the people of the United States, I give up on "muh freeze peach". I'm completely done. There is no saving this country or idiot, complacent white people, or American liberties in general. I want out."

You had a good run. You are already 80 in dog years. End it on a high note.

Nobody wins if this fucking fat retarded kike repeals this shit you dumb fuck

There's no other place to run, either. This is bad, but most places are worse. The Internet is going to be more and more restricted. Compare this to the legislation coming out of the EU, Article 13 and so on. As bad as America is, it's one of our last hopes.

Thank you for KiwiFarms by the way, Null. This place has not only provided entertainment, it has also brought some truth to the world.

So Trump is officially a Karen. Kek. But no worries @Null this will go the same way every other executive order has gone. Nowhere. He's just shit flinging to rial the base. I mean, what legally can he do? The FCC will just tell him if you don't like twitter, get the fuck off of it.

Trump should create a Gab account.

 

[Null]

I've made a thread analyzing the siduation.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/battle-for-section-230.70375/

 

[trustedherd]

The law is incredibly simple.

If you run a network or a website, and someone uses it to do something bad, you are not liable for it (with exception). Websites that editorialize (newspapers) are still liable. This is why Hulk Hogan can sue Buzzfeed, but Vordrak can't sue the Kiwi Farms.

What Trump is threatening to do to hurt Twitter is repeal this law, so if someone uses Twitter to do something bad, Twitter is liable for it. He is trying to 'clarify' the law so that deleting tweets and banning accounts is editorialization. Repealing the law in its entirety makes everyone personally, civilly liable for anything published on their platform.

Notice how what he's threatening to do doesn't actually solve the problem. It just makes these platforms so liable for what they publish that the only solution is to censor even more. Any defamation complaint would mean tweets and videos would have to go down. If someone posts something here and I get a complaint it's defamatory, I have to delete it or accept liability.

Currently, the process is: Person goes to court, gets court order to remove content, content is removed. The impetus is on the person to go to court.

Contrast that with the DMCA. Section 230 explicitly does not cover IP. So when I get a DMCA complaint, and I tell them to fuck off, I actually am personally accepting responsibility for that content. Every time I do this I evaluate the use of the work and decide if it's fair or not. This is me sticking my neck out on behalf of users.

(2) No effect on intellectual property law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to intellectual property.

I can't do that for statements. Every time someone claims a post is defamation, I have to evaluate the facts and determine if I trust those claims so much that I believe I can personally represent it in court on behalf of the person making the post.

To anyone who would say "you're in Serbia, why do you care?" my answer is: I am physically in Serbia, but my possessions are not. Verisign, the company that leases all .NET domains, is American. My bank accounts are American (and thanks to the USA PATRIOT Act, unregulated banks like Swiss banks do not allow Americans to have accounts with them). My hardware is in the US. My datacenter is in the US. My LLCs are American. A civil judgement against me means they can take all of that, including the domain, Few other countries have the strong and broad protections for both speech and services as the US does currently.

Repealing Section 230 does not just spite Twitter. It emboldens Twitter to censor as hard as possible and jeopardizes any small forum without financial resources. I cannot become an outlaw for the forum. I cannot throw away my American citizenship for the forum. I've already done enough, and with the way Trump supporters are cheering this on, I don't even want to even bother.

You are dead right mate and it's a shame if Trump does that. What about just enforcing the First Amendment for all social media platforms, just like in normal society?

 

[Null]

What about just enforcing the First Amendment for all social media platforms, just like in normal society?

>go to coffee shop
>"NIGGER"
>asked to leave

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

The EO didn't repeal (or attempt to repeal) section 230. This is why doomposting is bad. People come in and assume the worst.

The EO isn't the real problem here.

 

[Dread First]

10 years ago, we had the internet in an uproar about SOPA and CISPA and it's now about repealing or otherwise editing Section 230.

I gotta hand it to the politicians on this one - they finally realised that making new laws regarding the internet will rarely work when it comes down to hiding their papertrail. Here's to hoping that this won't come to pass.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

That's the point. There is a concept of "the hell of getting precisely what you asked for." Repealing section 230 will be like tube feeding a glutton. He's not trying to put out a fire, he's throwing kerosene on it. When Twitter either fails in the task, or has censored so many people that it loses subscribership, it'll be the desired example (Saul Alinsky). The flat call for repeal is two fold a.) He can't legally just target Twitter. In order for this to survive an injunction, it has to be placed broadly and evenly. B.) It's similar to private Pyle eating the donut while the rest of his bunkmates do jumping jacks. Jack, and anyone like him, if this gets legs under it, will likely be so radioactive by the end of it, they'll never have another project again, and who knows, we may wind up seeing the death of social media broadly.

Why should the rest of us have to pay for a petty dispute between Trump and Twatter? It doesn't even help him in the long run, he's blowing steam out of impulse because of a perceived antagonism in section 230. I honestly hope that's as far as he goes on the matter but he's already opened the can of worms and people have heard his call to action.

 

[Symalsa]

Someone who understands Trump please explain the logic behind this. I understand the argument that social media companies aren’t compliant with 230, but how will completely repealing this help with the censorship problem? It seems like removing this protection would encourage censorship on a scale we’ve never seen before.

Is there any logic to be found or is this just him doing anything possible to hurt the company who censored him personally?

there’s no logic. Orange nigger is bottom blasted bc a hippie clicked a button at TwitterHQ

The EO didn't repeal (or attempt to repeal) section 230. This is why doomposting is bad. People come in and assume the worst.

no but he’s asking the FCC reconsider it. This has been shot tf down by the FCC in the past. And they know they won’t ever win in court. Twitter Jesus just lost in court and trump is mad he got a CW Mastodon style. Lmfbo this is fun to watch though

 

[Jan Ciągwa]

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

[LazarusOwenhart]

Only if he starts doing heavy handed censorship that is considered editorial conduct. If he continues the "hands off" approach, then kiwifarms will still be protected by 230.


View attachment 1332725

Hands off? The amount of moderation and curation required to stop this place turning into the world hottest dumpster fire is something we mere mortals can barely understand.

 

[grump]

Fucking hell. What the fucking shit is this President? Of course this happens the MOMENT I get my lazy ass to finally make a Kiwi account. FFS.

If 230 gets repealed, does that mean the cows win?

This truly is the worst timeline

The amount of Americans that are underestimating the consequences of this are staggering. I think I'll try laughing with the rest of the world on this one while I'm reduced to being policed by internet Karens like Trump.

You are dead right mate and it's a shame if Trump does that. What about just enforcing the First Amendment for all social media platforms, just like in normal society?

Why should the rest of us have to pay for a petty dispute between Trump and Twatter? It doesn't even help him in the long run, he's blowing steam out of impulse because of a perceived antagonism in section 230. I honestly hope that's as far as he goes on the matter but he's already opened the can of worms and people have heard his call to action.

there’s no logic. Orange nigger is bottom blasted bc a hippie clicked a button at TwitterHQ

For the last time. 230 HAS NOT BE REPEALED. All Trump has done is drafted an EO that is likely GOOD for kiwifarms and shitposters. You're all losing your heads over Null's overliteral reading of one 2 word tweet. He already has an EO that does everything he wants, why would he go off and do something else that absolutely does nothing for him or his ego at all and only benefits his enemies?

Okay, I suppose everything is always possible but wholesale removal of all protections is no more likely than it has ever been....from Trump's side at least, and its made less likely because you can actually see what they probably want to do in the EO text iteslf. Even if he wanted to he couldn't do it by himself and why would Congressional Republicans want to torpedo their support base because a single Tweet by Drumpf gives the illusion that 230 is bad when in actuality they would benefit simply by changing a small portion?

Man people here are no different from gullible boomer normies. In a couple months all will be forgotten yet again and Null will have you guys eating out of his hands again with some theory of Drumpf invading Earth at the head of a Martian army.

 

[fuzakeru na]

I'm still baffled as to how Trump is even the president of the US to begin with. He's such a lying fool most of the time. And he says untrue statements on Twitter, and now he's having a temper tantrum just because he gets fact checked on the site. It's just embarrassing to watch...I'll just relax and make more drawings in the meantime.

First you need to learn just how fucking stupid the average person is and then realise that 50% of them are even dumber than that. People from the USA are highly retarded people, everyone used to say "the american dream" that doesn't even exist. It's not Trumps fault, if anything, he's broken the mould of all the stupid cunts that came before him. If you ask 100 people all around the world who's the most hated ignorant despised nation..... 90 of them will answer the same thing. But this was the same going back 20 years.

 

[Huitzilopochtli]

Why should the rest of us have to pay for a petty dispute between Trump and Twatter? It doesn't even help him in the long run, he's blowing steam out of impulse because of a perceived antagonism in section 230. I honestly hope that's as far as he goes on the matter but he's already opened the can of worms and people have heard his call to action.

Why do you think that matters? Like at all? Don't forget, we're all nobody. We only vote for top ape on bullshit mountain. Whatever that ape decides to do from the point of inauguration on we have tertiary control at best. That's how a democratic republic works.

 

[MarvinTheParanoidAndroid]

For the last time. 230 HAS NOT BE REPEALED. All Trump has done is drafted an EO that is likely GOOD for kiwifarms and shitposters.

Yes, we're all well aware that the EO means effectively nothing on its own, we're talking about his Twitter screeds now, the ones where he screams "REPEAL U.S. CODE 230!!!" in all caps with multiple explanation marks.

Yes, we're aware that these screeds do not constitute legislation, we're talking about the possibility of things coming over the horizon that might be currently in the works without our knowing.

Why do you think that matters? Like at all? Don't forget, we're all nobody.

"Allow me to just lay down and die because I have no choice." ~the Founding Fathers, apparently.

Whatever that ape decides to do from the point of inauguration on we have tertiary control at best. That's how a democratic republic works.

This isn't an autocracy that grants unlimited powers to a Caesar, there are provisions in place to prevent bullshit from happening on a whim. This democratic republic we've set up is the only reason we have a chance of stopping anything before it gets out of control.

 

[ConSlut#5000]

Having the kind of rabid supporters orange man has, he could literally say kill the first amendment and he'd get traction for that. It's just in this case, he said "HERP A DERP REPEAL THE 230RD."

Didn't some Cuck from South Carolina and Mitch McConnell propose having a council of 19 or so senators that decide which websites are able to qualify for that kind of protection? They too wanted to repeal it and limit it for their preferred sites.

 

[Jan Ciągwa]

This needs to be approved by congress etc. Even the text of the Executive order is vague and not binding:

"The FTC shall consider taking action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law,"

"shall consider" is not "will consider" or "must consider"

"shall" in legal context means "will" or "must" IIRC