California stopped dead in its little fascist tracks.

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Sep 27, 2012
94,232
56,645
2,605

U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez acknowledged the “risks posed by artificial intelligence and deepfakes are significant”, but granted a preliminary injunction against the law stating that it likely violates the First Amendment.
In his ruling, the judge wrote that fear of deepfakes may be justified, but “this fear does not give legislators unbridled license to bulldoze over the longstanding tradition of critique, parody, and satire protected by the First Amendment.”
Mendez said the law “acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free unfettered exchange of ideas.”


Freedom isnt free or easy to keep. Good on this judge for setting aside his emotion and ruling properly.
Another win for the good guys.
 

U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez acknowledged the “risks posed by artificial intelligence and deepfakes are significant”, but granted a preliminary injunction against the law stating that it likely violates the First Amendment.
In his ruling, the judge wrote that fear of deepfakes may be justified, but “this fear does not give legislators unbridled license to bulldoze over the longstanding tradition of critique, parody, and satire protected by the First Amendment.”
Mendez said the law “acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free unfettered exchange of ideas.”


Freedom isnt free or easy to keep. Good on this judge for setting aside his emotion and ruling properly.
Another win for the good guys.
Great post and spot on.

Their newest law making it illegal to require or use Photo ID to vote is almost as onerous but I can't find a Constitutional clause to get California out of that one unless Photo ID to vote becomes national law.
 
Great post and spot on.

Their newest law making it illegal to require or use Photo ID to vote is almost as onerous but I can't find a Constitutional clause to get California out of that one unless Photo ID to vote becomes national law.
Im not sure about that one. I believe there are 11 or 12 other states that have that law as well.
They do this stuff right in front of our faces and we just sit back.. Sad.
 

U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez acknowledged the “risks posed by artificial intelligence and deepfakes are significant”, but granted a preliminary injunction against the law stating that it likely violates the First Amendment.
In his ruling, the judge wrote that fear of deepfakes may be justified, but “this fear does not give legislators unbridled license to bulldoze over the longstanding tradition of critique, parody, and satire protected by the First Amendment.”
Mendez said the law “acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free unfettered exchange of ideas.”


Freedom isnt free or easy to keep. Good on this judge for setting aside his emotion and ruling properly.
Another win for the good guys.

Attacks on our civil rights are a cornerstone of leftist governance.

When the judicial option doesn't work anymore, it's time to break out the guns.
 
Im not sure about that one. I believe there are 11 or 12 other states that have that law as well.
They do this stuff right in front of our faces and we just sit back.. Sad.
Actually 14 states and DC require no identification at all to vote. In New Mexico I am asked my name, birthdate and address and I receive my ballot. So anybody who knows that name, birthdate and address could vote in my name. Or any dead person still on the rolls and there are many many of those. Or any comatose person in a nursing home or whatever.

Further, when I complete my paper ballot, it is fed into an electronic machine for tabulation. I have absolutely no way to know if that machine tabulates my ballot as I voted or if it tabulates it at all. Recounts are not automatic unless the margin is less than .025, .05 or 1% of the vote depending on the race and even then the one requesting the recount must pay for it.

That is why New Mexico is a deep blue state and has never EVER had a GOP controlled legislature in either chamber in the 112 year history of the state. And they have now redrawn district lines to ensure no Republican is likely to ever again be elected to the federal House or Senate or give a majority to a Republican running for President.

And it is why distrust in elections is becoming much more commonplace with a substantial majority of Americans not trusting the outcome these days.
 

U.S. District Judge John A. Mendez acknowledged the “risks posed by artificial intelligence and deepfakes are significant”, but granted a preliminary injunction against the law stating that it likely violates the First Amendment.
In his ruling, the judge wrote that fear of deepfakes may be justified, but “this fear does not give legislators unbridled license to bulldoze over the longstanding tradition of critique, parody, and satire protected by the First Amendment.”
Mendez said the law “acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free unfettered exchange of ideas.”


Freedom isnt free or easy to keep. Good on this judge for setting aside his emotion and ruling properly.
Another win for the good guys.
Is this what you are posting about?

 
Another win for the good guys.
You make me laugh.

We live in a strange world. On one side, companies, research groups, and governments are working tirelessly and spending massive amounts of money to identify and stop deepfakes—digitally manipulated content. Their goal? To protect us from a flood of false information, whether it's text, images, or videos. On the other side, we have a presidential candidate who is exploiting this technology for his own political gain.

Trump's Deepfake Strategy: Eroding Truth with a World of Lies​

 

Forum List

Back
Top