Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They asked social media to take down posts spreading disinformation about the election that affected both sides.
You missed that because you listen to people who are using you.
Those people don't want to be ruled by murdering, Imperialist, Fascist, dictators. That's good enough reason for me. People somehow forgot about Hitler. He didn't go any where.
Nonsense. Internet infrastructure is built and funded by private telecommunications. Fiber was laid coast to coast by phone companies back in the day and continues to be managed and upgraded by private money. Social media companies, like the rest of us, pay these private (not public) enterprises to access the network.That platform depends upon public infrastructure and the community to exist and has certain obligations to the community it serves. If the community decides that a social media platform and its assets are monopolizing and controlling the dissemination of information and have too much power and influence over people's lives, it can impose laws, and regulations to protect the users of those internet platforms. Amazon and Google have monopolized much of the infrastructure of the internet, so for example not that long ago, a very popular right-wing conservative social media app, was closed down by Amazon, because of its political views. Amazon didn't want to host that social media platform on its extensive cloud network.
If it wasn't for the public, the government, Amazon wouldn't exist, and neither would any of these social media platforms. So the public can, if it deems necessary, force social media companies to respect the freedom of speech of their users. How you personally feel about it is irrelevant, because it's not you or I who determine this, but rather the community. All of us together determine what the laws and regulations are, not you or I personally, as individuals. I suspect the majority of people in society are for the legal protection of the freedom of speech, of the users of giant social media platforms.
Yes. They asked. They did not force.They didn't ask, they forced. If you think there aren't any negative, even catastrophic consequences for refusing to comply with the US government's request for censorship, on your privately owned social media platform, you're quite naive and confused.
Nonsense. Internet infrastructure is built and funded by private telecommunications. Fiber was laid coast to coast by phone companies back in the day and continues to be managed and upgraded by private money. Social media companies, like the rest of us, pay these private (not public) enterprises to access the network.
Social media companies built their own servers, software and spent countless hours and money cultivating and perfecting their platform which was rewarded by the free market by people using them.
I need no protection from social media companies. I can very easily choose which to use and which not to use. I need no protection from social media taking down my content because I’m not so entitled to think I have a right to use their property to publish my speech.
The government would violate the first amendment by compelling speech from social media companies just the same as when Russia passes law punishing social media companies from hosting content critical of their authoritarian regime.
Yes. They asked. They did not force.
Go ahead and tell us what these consequences were, because we know that social media companies often did not comply with the requests from the government.
when did congress declare war?
You don't have any evidence for your claims. As always, you are nothing but a miserable pos liar.
I guess you’re the authoritarian since you think that the public can decide who gets rights and who doesn’t.No Public = No government = No internet or social media giants.
Without government protection, you couldn't even have private property. You need courts, law enforcement,..etc, and plenty of publicly funded, built, and maintained infrastructure.
The internet began as ARPANET, a government computer network. Much of the technology that these companies rely on was researched and developed with plenty of government support, sometimes exclusively funded by public funds in government institutions. Many of these companies rely on government permits for access to public infrastructure and land, not to speak of all of the contracts, loans, grants, and subsidies that the private sector receives from the American public through its government. If it wasn't for government protected patents, Amazon and Google wouldn't have such a large market share or monopoly.
To build broadband networks, internet service providers (ISPs) must install infrastructure on public and private land, and to do that, they must obtain permits and easements. Permits provide access to the public rights of way, such as streets, sidewalks or highways, and allow ISPs to place infrastructure within and to access the right of way for purposes of construction or maintenance. All of the aformentioned activities are in cooperation with the community through its government authorities.
The bottom line is that the community, the people decide, how commerce is conducted, what the rights are of these social media giants and monopolies, not you or me as individuals. It's the community that decides what they have the right to do and what they can't do.
Ukraine didn't have freedom of the press for those who expressed any pro-Russian sentiments before the war, and now of course even less. Ukraine is just as authoratarian as Russia so you have no moral highground upon which to stand and point your crooked, feculent finger at Russia. There's no justification for fighting WW3 with Russia over Ukrainian sovereignty. That's truly loony tunes.
Constitution decides with representative lawmakers. Big word, representative. Know what that means?I guess you’re the authoritarian since you think that the public can decide who gets rights and who doesn’t.
That’s not how the constitutional government works. People have rights that the “public” can’t take away from us. The government cannot compel speech, even in a setting of commerce. See the Miami Herald v Tornillo.
As for Ukraine, not going to lie. They did curtail press in some ways. Any country does that when their very survival is at stake. We’ve done it numerous times.
Russia doesn’t curtail freedom of the press for national survival. They do it for regime survival.
Ukraine isn’t perfect but it isn’t on par with Russian, not by a long shot. Saying they’re the same is loony tunes. In Russia, opposition leaders are killed. Hell, Russia even kills opposition leaders in Ukraine. Or at least they tried to.
When will the Polish MIGs be flown in ?When did Ukraine join NATO??
When will the Polish MIGs be flown in ?
Lawmakers cannot write laws that violate the constitution.Constitution decides with representative lawmakers. Big word, representative. Know what that means?
Sending tanks without a declaration of war is just thatLawmakers cannot write laws that violate the constitution.
I swear. You chumps must have dropped out before middle school.
I guess you’re the authoritarian since you think that the public can decide who gets rights and who doesn’t.
That’s not how the constitutional government works. People have rights that the “public” can’t take away from us. The government cannot compel speech, even in a setting of commerce. See the Miami Herald v Tornillo.
As for Ukraine, not going to lie. They did curtail press in some ways. Any country does that when their very survival is at stake. We’ve done it numerous times.
Russia doesn’t curtail freedom of the press for national survival. They do it for regime survival.
Ukraine isn’t perfect but it isn’t on par with Russian, not by a long shot. Saying they’re the same is loony tunes. In Russia, opposition leaders are killed. Hell, Russia even kills opposition leaders in Ukraine. Or at least they tried to.
It’s not.Sending tanks without a declaration of war is just that
Did Ukraine buy them? NoIt’s not.
That's just your personal opinion, justifying all of the ultranationalist authoritarianism in Ukraine, and the anti-Russian persecution. Pretending that Russia's national security needs and concerns are invalid and that NATO can do whatever it wants on Russia's border, including turning Ukraine into its launching pad. It's not going to happen. There's no reasoning or negotiating with people who think like you. You're justifying WW3 with Russia over what could be nothing more than a regional conflict between two countries. You're willing to destroy all life on planet earth because Russia isn't a Jeffersonian democracy and its too socially conservative. You American liberals are nuts.
As far as your comments on constitutions and rights, all of that is meaningless without a community of human beings. All constitutions with their rights are created by human beings, they don't magically descend from the aether, delivered by a giant hand wearing a white glove like Michael Jackson.
" Heeheeeeeeee! Here is your constitution with all of your rights, heeeeheeeee!"
It’s still not.Did Ukraine buy them? No
Bullshit. How can you even say that? And the people I support would not treat me like a guinea pig. You cannot say that.They asked social media to take down posts spreading disinformation about the election that affected both sides.
You missed that because you listen to people who are using you.
