Texas governor signs bill prohibiting social media giants from blocking users based on viewpoint

Enforce what mandate - Against who ? The Gov't 1) does not have a mandate targeting private companies (sans one tht has become a monopoly but none have) - and so 2) no need to enforce anything.

You seem to lack comprenension of what is being discussed here. Do you not know the difference between a Publically Traded Oligopoly and a private company .. like seriously - how far back do we need to go to begin your education here ?

 

Demanding that corporations not stifle free speech is no more a "boot on the throat" than demanding they not murder anyone. Its that simple. This isn't rocket science.

 

Corporations cannot violate the 1st amendment. There is nothing a corporation could do that would violate the first amendment.

 

Friend, pasting numbers into an Excel sheet is not intellectually demanding. Conceiving how an eye-safe laser can cover a target at 10 kilometers is very complex and requires extensive knowledge of many things well beyond a beancounter. (I happen to hold a patent for that. One version uses a six degree of freedon piezo-electric platform to aim the laser, an improved version uses fiber optic bundles).

 

That's for the courts to decide. They are doing so right now, based on the federal legislation granting social media special immunity. We'll see.

 

I think everyone here, except you, knows that is not what everyone in US metros do. You know, those evil metros which generate 85% of US economic output.

I don't know why you have such animosity against people who work with their brains. I don't see anyone rave against farmers, or those who work with their hands, including doctors. Did you know there are over 50 000 doctors in NY? Of course you think they all count beans in the basement.

 

I give up on these people. They don't know the first thing about the Constitution, and nor do they care to know, because you can spell it out, and they'll continue to pretend it doesn't say what it says.

 

I understand that beancounters can generate wealth. I never denied that. Accountants made money in the 1800's but Edison had more impact on the world. Accountants made money in Ford's time, but Ford changed the world. Its just the difference between a rich guy like Scrooge and an Astronaut. I'd much rather fly than huddle at a desk.

 

Ok, we get it. You want to silence everyone that doesn't agree with you. We get it.

 

Its absurdly ignorant you think everyone is an accountant, but heck, whatever gets you through the night.

Not at all, you can squeal, shriek and howl all you want. No one is going to silence you.

 

I never said everyone was an accountant. You are either a liar or you can't read. If you need some tutoring help, let me know.

 

Sure sounds like that is what you are saying. I sent you a list of professions / industries which are common in NYC, and you keep reducing that to bean-counters / accountants as is that is what everyone there does. Its like you are offended by the fact that NYC generates so much economic output. What do you care? NYC metro generates more economic output than Canada. Get used to it. There are white collar jobs and there are blue collar jobs, - both are necessary.

Where are New Yorkers employed
- Construction
- Trade transportation and utilities
- Information technology
- Finance activities
- Professional and Business services
- Health care
- Leisure and hospitality
- Real estate

 

I never said ALL were beancounterson your list... just most.

 

Differing political opinion is nothing like violence, porn, or any other stuff. It's simply filtering and censorship in an effort to quell voices of opposing viewpoints.

This is highly toxic to the concept of freedom of speech, using private enterprise as the basis and means of such censorship.

You support it, because you oppose the viewpoint. You are willing to hack away at the very concept and foundations of free democracy and exchange of ideas to suit your partisan desires. If this was on the other foot... you would be screaming bloody murder.

It's really pretty sad. How partisan we have become. Sieg Heil! Right?

 

Private enterprise is just that: private. They don't have to make it available to everyone.

Sorry, but I do not have a party. I support private property rights, and you don't. I have always opposed government getting involved in things like this. Always. People have tried to explain the 1st Amendment here, and the fact that only Congress can violate freedom of speech, but for whatever reason some people cannot understand it. You do not have a right to use other peoples property to promote or publish anything. The property owner decides how they property should be used. Its communist / fascist mindset which demands to make private property public and free for all to use.

You mean like if Biden mandates FOX News to make their facilities and property available for unlimited use by Democrat politicians? Yes, I would absolutely oppose it, - and so should you. However, I have to assume you would support it like you support it when Republicans do it. Right? I mean, otherwise you'd be a hypocrite.

Its sad that people can't see how they are played into supporting authoritarian / communist actions.

So, porn, profanities and violent images are excluded from freedom of speech? What else is excluded? That's is the thing, King Abbott decides for everyone what is and isn't covered under "freedom of speech". No, let the owners of the platform decide. Porn platforms can show porn, other sites can show violence and profanities, and social media can moderate their platform as they see fit. A new Conservative platform allowed everything until radical islamists flooded their site with beheadings and other nonsense, so they re-defined "freedom of speech" to suit their needs. They need to have that ability.

Ehhhh........whatever makes you happy.

 

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Its very sad how some victims of the liberal party line get suckered into stifling free speech. Worse yet, some liberals seem to feel that stifling free speech is liberty. How far we have fallen.

 

I'm sure you know this but I'm posting it for anyone that happens along the conversation and doesn't know.

This does NOT apply in with easements or eminent domain.

AN easement is *public property* that crosses someone's private property (ie. a sidewalk). The city owns the sidewalk but the property owner owns the house, the land the house is on and the land on the other side of the sidewalk. The government owns from the curbs, street and curb across the street until it gets to the property owner across the street.

Eminent domain is when the government can seize private property for its use (with compensation to the property owner). This usually only happens in extreme cases but it is a legal right retained by our government.

 

The real issue here is not what Facebook or Twitter or Instagram do, they are private companies and can restrict speech at will. The real issue is that we no longer enforce monopoly laws making it damn near impossible for real competition to provide other forums for right wing whack jobs to flaunt their idiocy on like real Muricans.

 

Yes, I am aware of easements.

Lets see if the populists play the eminent domain card and make social media truly public property. It is a form of nationalization, and these new laws are getting close to it already, because the laws force private property to be considered public property. The government doesn't have to own the company if they can create laws which submits them to government control (like we are seeing in Texas).

 

They have them, and the one I mentioned was advertised "mod-free" until it was flooded with porn and islamist nonsense, and they had to put an end to what they called "free speech". I believe the site is called GETTR, and there is also GAB. Both are considered troll havens.

So, they have their own sites, but they insist on using the sites they constantly rail against.

 

Give me a break about restricting right wing speech, Rush owned the AM dial for decades. Now some companies are fed up with the bull and say enough is enough. Bout damn time.

 

I assumed you were which is why I wrote "I'm sure you already know this..." part.

Well, some people here have been very vocal about vaccine manufacturers being protected from lawsuits or they wouldn't bother with it. So, if any whackadoodle can go on any social media site, form a plan for an insurrection and Capitol police officers die and hundreds more are injured, is the social media "free and clear" of all liability? I would argue they should be if the government can force them to all anybody with a computer or phone to post their midnight musings of nationwide destruction.

 

So liberals actually DEFEND the stifling and limiting of free speech... wow! How far we have fallen!
Can you connect the dots between Rush speaking freely long ago and people stifling free speech today? (Apples and Space Shuttles)

 

Would you hold this opinion if all the details were the same but our former POTUS was a Democrat?

 

The Alt-Right social media GETTR and GAB have no rules against inciting violence, but they did have to re-define "free speech" after they were trolled heavily, so now there are some rules and restrictions to keep non Alt-Right folks censored, but I doubt they fear Abbott harassing them the way he went after FB, Twitter and YouTube. As for censoring non Alt-Right, that is fine, as the property owner they can create any rule they want. That is what freedom is all about, or that's what it was all about until recently.