-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I'm not sure if folk here are paying attention or going off old news but Biden is making regular appearances and being very coherent even when reporters try to tryp him up. Has recently appeared very statesmanlike in his comment around Afghanistan and the Statues issue. Has played the ball rather than the man.
Early in the piece yet as well and candidates need to tread a line regarding over-exposure. Keep some powder dry for debates etc.A link example would be helpful.
It's called current affairs. Look at many sources, filter out the obvious fawning or logic jumping and underneath are descriptions and reality.
I'm not going to link every thing I see to save you the trouble or to provide you with stuff to critique.
Google has a search function called 'news' . You could start there.
You won't find it following Twitter.I did. But I wasn't impressed still
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I'm not sure if folk here are paying attention or going off old news but Biden is making regular appearances and being very coherent even when reporters try to tryp him up. Has recently appeared very statesmanlike in his comment around Afghanistan and the Statues issue. Has played the ball rather than the man.
Early in the piece yet as well and candidates need to tread a line regarding over-exposure. Keep some powder dry for debates etc.A link example would be helpful.
It's called current affairs. Look at many sources, filter out the obvious fawning or logic jumping and underneath are descriptions and reality.
I'm not going to link every thing I see to save you the trouble or to provide you with stuff to critique.
Google has a search function called 'news' . You could start there.
You won't find it following Twitter.I did. But I wasn't impressed still
I didn't ask you to be impressed.
Am I somehow meant to provide links that impress you?The assessment of Biden's statements is quite obviously my opinion. The fact is that he is making coherent appearances/releases etc contrary to some statements here that he is hiding away in fear of his own senility.
I'm no big fan of Biden, just following what is actually going on and commenting on it.
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I don’t get this whole “election interference “ rubbish.
AFAIK Twitter is a private organisation that has a right to allow or disallow whoever they like. They certainly don’t have to allow themselves to be an advertising or promotional tool for everyone.
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Don't have a problem with that.
But Twitter should have the honesty and integrity to spell out clearly how its views and political partiality impact on users and how it censors it's platform. We all know where Fox News & CNN stand, why not Twitter?
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Again, no problem with that. But let's have an anti-trust investigation into Twitter's virtual monopoly of micro-blogging media to ensure the public do have a choice.
Is micro-blogging a right now? They only have a monopoly because users don’t want to change.
I’m being silly here I know but some of the very people that are so adamant about their “rights” on things like not wearing masks are also first in the queue to complain about a business having rights as well.
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
The issue is this. They shoudl either be forced to comply with this agreement. Or have it immediately removed
“With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” said Sen. Hawley. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain.”
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
“There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with,” Hawley said in a statement. “Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public.”
Funny, because I found their rules quite easy to find https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules and quite clear.
Just like rugby laws though, the referees interpretation can sometimes not agree with your own.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I don’t get this whole “election interference “ rubbish.
AFAIK Twitter is a private organisation that has a right to allow or disallow whoever they like. They certainly don’t have to allow themselves to be an advertising or promotional tool for everyone.
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Don't have a problem with that.
But Twitter should have the honesty and integrity to spell out clearly how its views and political partiality impact on users and how it censors it's platform. We all know where Fox News & CNN stand, why not Twitter?
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Again, no problem with that. But let's have an anti-trust investigation into Twitter's virtual monopoly of micro-blogging media to ensure the public do have a choice.
Is micro-blogging a right now? They only have a monopoly because users don’t want to change.
I’m being silly here I know but some of the very people that are so adamant about their “rights” on things like not wearing masks are also first in the queue to complain about a business having rights as well.
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
The issue is this. They shoudl either be forced to comply with this agreement. Or have it immediately removed
“With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” said Sen. Hawley. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain.”
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
“There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with,” Hawley said in a statement. “Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public.”
Funny, because I found their rules quite easy to find https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules and quite clear.
Just like rugby laws though, the referees interpretation can sometimes not agree with your own.
As I understand things people or companies are being banned without any reason given. At times they have been on a site for years and then just banned.
Trumps approach is a good one. Let then do this but take away their exemption -
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I don’t get this whole “election interference “ rubbish.
AFAIK Twitter is a private organisation that has a right to allow or disallow whoever they like. They certainly don’t have to allow themselves to be an advertising or promotional tool for everyone.
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Don't have a problem with that.
But Twitter should have the honesty and integrity to spell out clearly how its views and political partiality impact on users and how it censors it's platform. We all know where Fox News & CNN stand, why not Twitter?
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Again, no problem with that. But let's have an anti-trust investigation into Twitter's virtual monopoly of micro-blogging media to ensure the public do have a choice.
Is micro-blogging a right now? They only have a monopoly because users don’t want to change.
I’m being silly here I know but some of the very people that are so adamant about their “rights” on things like not wearing masks are also first in the queue to complain about a business having rights as well.
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
The issue is this. They shoudl either be forced to comply with this agreement. Or have it immediately removed
“With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” said Sen. Hawley. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain.”
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
“There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with,” Hawley said in a statement. “Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public.”
Funny, because I found their rules quite easy to find https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules and quite clear.
Just like rugby laws though, the referees interpretation can sometimes not agree with your own.
As I understand things people or companies are being banned without any reason given. At times they have been on a site for years and then just banned.
Trumps approach is a good one. Let then do this but take away their exemptionExamples? 'As I understand things' doesn't cut the mustard.
Twitter would have to ban Trump immediately if he removed the exemption. His comments open them up to all sorts of legal action.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
The assessment of Biden's statements is quite obviously my opinion. T
All I asked for was just one example to back this up.
"Biden is making regular appearances and being very coherent even when reporters try to tryp him up."
You may be right but I haven't seen any improvement yet. And comparing Biden to just a few years back the decline is noticeable
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I don’t get this whole “election interference “ rubbish.
AFAIK Twitter is a private organisation that has a right to allow or disallow whoever they like. They certainly don’t have to allow themselves to be an advertising or promotional tool for everyone.
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Don't have a problem with that.
But Twitter should have the honesty and integrity to spell out clearly how its views and political partiality impact on users and how it censors it's platform. We all know where Fox News & CNN stand, why not Twitter?
If they favour one side then it becomes obvious and consumers get to choose
whether to use their product.Again, no problem with that. But let's have an anti-trust investigation into Twitter's virtual monopoly of micro-blogging media to ensure the public do have a choice.
Is micro-blogging a right now? They only have a monopoly because users don’t want to change.
I’m being silly here I know but some of the very people that are so adamant about their “rights” on things like not wearing masks are also first in the queue to complain about a business having rights as well.
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
The issue is this. They shoudl either be forced to comply with this agreement. Or have it immediately removed
“With Section 230, tech companies get a sweetheart deal that no other industry enjoys: complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship,” said Sen. Hawley. “Unfortunately, and unsurprisingly, big tech has failed to hold up its end of the bargain.”
Yeah, Twitter should have a written policy around what is acceptable on their platform (oh they already do?).
“There’s a growing list of evidence that shows big tech companies making editorial decisions to censor viewpoints they disagree with,” Hawley said in a statement. “Even worse, the entire process is shrouded in secrecy because these companies refuse to make their protocols public.”
Funny, because I found their rules quite easy to find https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules and quite clear.
Just like rugby laws though, the referees interpretation can sometimes not agree with your own.
All I asked for was just one example to back this up. It may be right but I haven't seen any improvement yet. And comparing Biden to just a few years back the decline is noticeable
"Biden is making regular appearances and being very coherent even when reporters try to tryp him up."
It's an opinion not a fact.
Regarding appearances, that may be a bit misleading as he has only recently held an open Q&A but has been making statements, so yeah, maybe some could see that as hiding away. Fair due.
You can watch videos of his press conference and IMO he is coherent and shows no signs of senility.As far as my opinion that his comments were statesmanlike goes, I base that on him explaining his position with recognition of other opposing opinions, looking for solutions rather than being arrogant. Whether you agree with that assessment is up to you. I can't prove it and no link will do so either.
My only point is that he appeared in front of the press, took questions without avoidance on many subjects and spoke clearly about his stance and position regarding them.
Methinks you buy into the nicknames and doctored videos too much.
-
What is really laughable is people concerned about Biden when Trump struggles to form sentences and apparently can't even make it obvious when he is being sarcastic like most people can. Not a good trait for a statesman. You kind of want people to know whether to take your comments at face value or not.
-
Without section 230 the internet would be a very differnt place. Forums, comments sections and social media would basically not exist because no one would take the risk
In defamation cases the commentator is liable not the host of the service. That is a good thing.
For instance if 230 didn't exist and TSF was in the US, kirwan would be liable for what winger has to say. Fuck that.
A news paper with a comments section is not liable for the comments underneath. Twitter is all comments. If they produce their own content (an editorial, or they engage in the conversation and make defamatory response etc) they will be liable for that content.
There is no carve out for certain companies. the law simply recognises that comments aren't the same as a traditional publishing process.This sentence is a lie
"complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship"This deal does not exist in the law.
This article is pretty good response to Senator Hawleys comments: https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/06/22/why-we-need-section-230/
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
I'm not sure if folk here are paying attention or going off old news
Paying attention and have watched him in the last week
Yes he appearing slightly more recently. But the decline is still evident. It's hard to watch at times
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
What is really laughable is people concerned about Biden when Trump struggles to form sentences and apparently can't even make it obvious when he is being sarcastic like most people can. Not a good trait for a statesman. You kind of want people to know whether to take your comments at face value or not.
He looks significantly more lucid than Biden though. Not that it says much
-
@Crucial
Biden looks 106 years old and slurs his words.If you can ignore his obvious mental decline - which is huge worry given he is aiming to be in charge of the most powerful country in the world - and you have no qualms with the fact that in order to get their support he would have made deals behind the scenes with the radical left, then I guess he will be alright.
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
What is really laughable is people concerned about Biden when Trump struggles to form sentences and apparently can't even make it obvious when he is being sarcastic like most people can. Not a good trait for a statesman. You kind of want people to know whether to take your comments at face value or not.
He looks significantly more lucid than Biden though. Not that it says much
I'll agree to disagree. Biden can at least hold a train of thought for more than 10 seconds. He might speak slowly and have to wait for the words to catch up with the brain but Trump doesn't wait for the brain to catch up with the words.
Pretty sad state of affairs that the choice for the US is between two old blokes yelling at each other from their porches.
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
What is really laughable is people concerned about Biden when Trump struggles to form sentences and apparently can't even make it obvious when he is being sarcastic like most people can. Not a good trait for a statesman. You kind of want people to know whether to take your comments at face value or not.
He looks significantly more lucid than Biden though. Not that it says much
I'll agree to disagree. Biden can at least hold a train of thought for more than 10 seconds. He might speak slowly and have to wait for the words to catch up with the brain but Trump doesn't wait for the brain to catch up with the words.
Pretty sad state of affairs that the choice for the US is between two old blokes yelling at each other from their porches.
Looks doddery. But the stuff he says is far more sensible than Trump, more statesmanlike. And they need someone to bring them together right now
-
@Duluth said in US Politics:
This article is pretty good response to Senator Hawleys comments: https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2020/06/22/why-we-need-section-230/
I stopped reading at this point. The bill is only aiming at Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter. Not TSF. Its not aiming to repeal s230.
"If they get their way, Section 230 either will be repealed completely or will be watered down by the executive branch to the point at which it is no longer useful"
Hawley is not aiming at or interested in TSF. They are addressing bias by big sites like twitter
"Hawley’s bill would task the Federal Trade Commission with certifying that tech companies are approaching moderation in a neutral way, a requirement for any company with over 30 million monthly active users in the US, 300 million monthly active users globally, or $500 million in global revenue. Certification would require a supermajority vote, including at least one minority member, and would occur every two years. If a company over that threshold could not be certified, it would lose 230 protections and be subject to intermediary liability litigation."
-
"complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship"
Again - this statement is a lie
Why listen to a someone that is so brazenly lying about the current law? Why would you believe someone who is lying?
-
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
What is really laughable is people concerned about Biden when Trump struggles to form sentences and apparently can't even make it obvious when he is being sarcastic like most people can. Not a good trait for a statesman. You kind of want people to know whether to take your comments at face value or not.
He looks significantly more lucid than Biden though. Not that it says much
I'll agree to disagree. Biden can at least hold a train of thought for more than 10 seconds. He might speak slowly and have to wait for the words to catch up with the brain but Trump doesn't wait for the brain to catch up with the words.
Pretty sad state of affairs that the choice for the US is between two old blokes yelling at each other from their porches.
I find them both really difficult to listen to. Biden has better sentence structure but just says completely random shit and slurs his words at times. Trump just rambles, almost like he's trying to fill in space with words even if it makes no sense whatsoever.
-
@Duluth said in US Politics:
"complete exemption from traditional publisher liability in exchange for providing a forum free of political censorship"
Again - this statement is a lie
Why listen to a someone that is so brazenly lying about the current law? Why would you believe someone who is lying?
Do you believe there is an issue that needs to be addressed with the likes of facebook etc.
No one cares about smaller sites but what about the larger sites. Where election outcomes can be decided etc. Should be aim to allow all viewpoints to be expressed or just ones that fit with the elite owners (that may be foreign) of these sites. Or advertisersAnd regarding newspapers. My understanding is that even here papers are supposed to allow opposing viewpoints in the comments section. That these larger sites are closing down now.
-
I've stated my opinion on the problem with social media companies many times
One main difference is I don't have faith in a politician who is clearly lying about the current law.
The good thing is I suspect Hawley is also lying about his proposed solution. To me it seems like a bit of political theatre that he knows has no ability to pass. He gets to excite some gullible political partisans who are poorly informed but effectively he is doing nothing
US Politics