Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sewage and sewerage. New media and news
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sewage and sewerage. New media and news
pic.twitter.com/STCgxGezrQ
0
This discussion has been closed.
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Sewage and sewerage. New media and news
pic.twitter.com/STCgxGezrQ
Comments
If there was someone other than president dickbag in charge there would be plenty of ways to get this settled but there just seems to be no way out other than letting the riots burn out over the next couple of weeks and hoping some other racist cop doesn't step up and gun down an innocent black person.
The traditional media see removing the protection as levelling the playing field.
Ironically, because DT has trodden on the issue with his fat feet, everyone else has gone quiet on this.
Lies, damn lies & Matt Hancock’s statistics
What was decided at meeting to consider Alert Level held Thursday, as indicated by PM on Wednesday and who decided?
Are “Step 2” easing policy dates (eg Jun 1) no longer conditional on Alert level?
You can't think that's the case in America anymore.
When people can lynch Arbery on the streets after chasing him for minutes and nobody gets charged until the video leaks . . .
When the Police can murder Floyd after kneeling on his neck for eight minutes and nobody gets charged initially then either and still the 3 accomplices to his murder still haven't been charged yet . . .
America doesn't need a return to normal.
There is really no good reason why the Telegraph or the Times should be held to a higher standard than Facebook or Twitter. If publishing what someone else has said makes a paper vicariously liable it should make the internet giant liable too. But just maybe we should look at the reverse. Would it be better if defamation and libel were simply abolished? I think that there is a lot to be said for freedom of speech and we should not give up the right to say what we want too easily.
If 4 gangbangers had murdered someone this way all 4 would be hunted down and charged with Felony Murder at the least.
Many people here and elsewhere seem to think 4 Police Officers doing this and having 3 fired and one charged with third degree murder is sufficient. All 4 should be charged with murder, including the murderers accomplice colleagues who stood by listening to a dying man say "I can't breath" and did nothing.
What a depressing thought.
There was hope in the USA , when I was a child , watching the civil rights movement, and Apollo missions.
Now I watch America and feel a deep sadness that a once great country is descending into chaos.
The New York Times is held to a different standard than the Times because of that. The First Amendment should apply to the internet too.
Domestically I'd definitely rather see a move towards more freedom of speech than less.
The problem with the liability argument, is that is guarantees that the smaller the company is, the more vulnerable.yes
Applied in the UK - It could end up with OGH having to take out liability insurance on PB. Or close the comments.
As has been said many times, the 2020 election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of negative campaigning, attack ads and fake news - with Facebook, Google and Twitter in the middle of it all, making an offshore fortune from the division.
Almost the only thing that's going to have bipartisan agreement after the election, is the need to rein in the social media companies.
S230 protections are just the start of it, but as with most laws changed in haste there will be a lot of unintended consequences. It's certainly clear the law as currently written doesn't work though - Twitter's "fact check" link on Trump's tweet on postal vote fraud was to a CNN opinion piece, rather than an objective source. Twitter wants all the protections of being a conduit, with none of the downsides of being a publisher.
My sense is that those of my Six Ells ilk are fewer and farer between these days.
Leans Left – Lightly Libertarian – Largely Liberal
We seem to have quite a few socially conservative lefties (some quite disgustingly so) and quite a few socially liberal righties but fewer from my tradition.
Twitter can carry any voices it wants to. Their business model is to cater for almost anyone, but they are allowed to make their own choices.
One question is how that maps onto the Internet.
Rioting is not OK.
What came before the rioting is not OK either.
There are a handful I reckon of GOP people who haven't sold themselves to the devil on Trump. Mitt Romney being the leading one.
The smart play is for Trump to host a roundtable with protest leaders and police commissioners where they get to scream at each other for a couple of hours. He gets to say he's doing something and if there's a compromise found he can sponsor a bill with some federally mandated police training course to not kill unarmed or already subdued suspects with extremely harsh sentencing for those who do.
Unfortunately Trump isn't that smart.
We all might have the right to shout in the town square, but what happens if that town square gets converted into a private mall?
Oh, and lots of people (cough*Piers Morgan*cough) not believing the exit poll.
Anyone can then host a Twitter server, and serve their own ads and censorship rules on it.
Rioting isn't acceptable but ignoring murder isn't acceptable either. Maybe fewer crocodile tears and actually arresting anyone involved in murder and there'd be less protests resulting in riots. Just an idea.
When the riots end then the burnt down buildings can be destroyed. George Floyd and Arbery etc will still be dead.
One of the pernicious aspects of false news and defamatory or inflammatory material on social media is that the originators are usually anonymous (not Trump, obviously!). That means people are emboldened to post nasty stuff because there is no easy redress. Any updating of the law to take account of the technological changes of the past few years is bound to run up against this problem - and yet, how can the law protect people from vicious trolls without preventing genuine whistleblowers or ordinary people reporting from war zones or repressive regimes?
There are no easy answers.
The next review, due to start in 2021, will have to be completed by the Boundary Commissions by 1 July 2023. It will be based on the number of registered electorates as of 1 December 2020.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8921/
Main difference is I have a big big belief in the state intervening strongly to redistribute wealth and opportunity.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/jun/02/ai-firm-that-worked-with-vote-leave-wins-new-coronavirus-contract
It needs doing. The government has it's own motivations but so long as the commissioners remain untainted a process where the changes are automatic may be a necessity given parliaments approach for a decade.
(Coincidentally I was reading Camerons take on this in his autobiography just half an hour ago)
Surely a review every five years, ten years or a set time after each General Election would make more sense?
Central Camera Company Rebuild
https://www.gofundme.com/f/central-camera-company-rebuild
...On the night of May 30th into early morning May 31st, Central Camera Company, Chicago's oldest camera store, was destroyed and burned. We are still surveying the area to see if we can recover any assets, but at this time it looks like 100% destruction.
All funds raised on this page will go towards the restoration and reopening of our 121-year-old iconic camera store. We thank you all for your donations and kind messages. As our owner, Don said, “we’re going to rebuild it and make it just as good or better.”
Although this is a tough time for the store, it doesn’t compare to the loss of George Floyd’s life and the countless other Black lives lost. We stand with the African American community in solidarity....
https://twitter.com/nbcnews/status/1267519992427356162?s=21
Do you want to protect the lives of those threatened by the rioters, the lives of those threatened by the Police, or both?
Most the SNPers (you, TUD, Stuart) on here come closest to my credo – I think Malc is more socially conservative however.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/a-statement-from-the-chairman-of-the-spectator
I suppose it's a chance for all the cognitive biases to come out to play at once.
When we contacted the Scottish Conservatives about this, they admitted their press office had "used the wrong phrase."
https://twitter.com/FerretScot/status/1267720296720711680
I don't think it can be as simple as non Scots staying out of it. Which is not to say that the wishes of Scots should not predominate.
Hugely controversial to have this vote if many MPs not able to take part for health reasons.
I am *suggesting* that no Government can give in to the demands (if there are any actual demands) of a violent uprising whilst that uprising is on. They have to restore order first. It's a simple concept.
Looters, yes, throw the book at them.
My libertarianism is of the social / civil liberties variety.
I'm centre-left on the economy – support some intervention as you suggest and would nationalise the railways (for example).
https://twitter.com/Psythor/status/1267535954073526278
If there is an uprising to demand an end to state-sponsored violence then yes the Government can and should give in to that demand. Which isn't to say that an uprising or violence is a good idea, but many Governments down the years and across the globe have done just that.
The WCB has no monopoly on bigotry. It's still strong on Lewis even if it doesn't take the form of Orange walks or scrawling the praises of file transfer protocol on walls. Stornoway is claimed to have the biggest Rangers supporters' club in the world. I was on Lewis the day Boris Johnson became prime minister, when a guy in his 70s informed me sagely in a conversation that lasted all of about one minute that Johnson had been baptised Roman Catholic and therefore couldn't be trusted on Ireland.
And I well remember being lectured on how the only way to stay in the EU was to remain in the UK - and that message being targeted particularly at citizens from the rest of the EU who were then resident in Scotland.
Either that was a good faith promise, now broken, inm which case a replay is needed, given the high level of EU support in Scotland far beyond the SNP. Or "we didn't mean it really and any fool could see that Brexit was inevitable" - which makes it an outright and delibrate lie (which, in fact, was what I strongly suspected at the time).
Anyway, I onloy mention this as someone brought it up yesterday. I'm quite happy to save the rest of it till indyref 2!
Perhaps there's a justification for anti-trust action on Facebook to force conversion to an open model, but it doesn't really solve the problem - which is that people are generally really bad at critical thinking because of cognitive biases. Fake news just feels so much more true.
Sometimes black and white, and simple concepts don't work.
Unlike the outcome of the "once in a generation" referendum two years earlier.
He needs to find a way to address the protesters and their real issues. Engage with them and put forwards reforms and harsh sentencing for officers who kill unarmed suspects or who's actions result in the death of suspects who are already subdued. In this instance the officer just needed to cuff the suspect, book him and then he'd be out in a few hours. Ideally th police would have enough training not to even bother this person and there would be sanctions for police who do the above.