It’s intimidation. It’s headlines for the faithful and ignorant.
Never mind that every single chain in the “terrorist conspiracy” is nonsense…that’s just details. The message is that protest gets jail time.
The legality doesn’t matter…whether the sentences are overturned or reduced or kept in place by activist judges…the message to the faithful and ignorant is that “antifa” is a terrorist movement.
It’s my understanding that this dude was using his Canadian citizenship to spy for American companies. The other Michael even got a settlement from our government because he said he was detained for his association with this guy.
So yeah…I don’t find it surprising that a spy says China is going to spy….he’d know.
What’s happening right now is leftist gains are being rolled back…as they have been for these decades you speak of.
Do you think it’s because leftists “failed to get traction”, or because the previous gains were so successful too many people forgot where they came from?
Right? He tried. Got desperate when his poll numbers tanked…but he tried.
At the end of the day it’s shitty to acknowledge…but Canadians just might not be ready to elect a Sikh dude federally…even if I would argue he’s the best leader I’ve seen in my lifetime. He actually got something in exchange for his leverage, too. Maybe that didn’t even matter because leftists jumped on the Carney train en masse because of what’s going on down south and how obvious is was Pollievre would sell out souls to him. Little did they know Carney was going to saddle us with austerity that gives conservatives a wet dream…if it were a conservative (by party) doing it.
You see illegal content all the time, even if you won’t acknowledge you do.
They should be compelled to do whatever it takes so illegal content isn’t available on their platforms. There’s absolutely no reason user posts, and especially advertisements need to be available instantaneously. This notion that doomscrolling in real time or that being able to broadcast your message to the entire world instantly is somehow comparable to freedom of speech or speaking in a town square is absurd.
I couldn’t give a single rats ass how much it costs. And no…your ballpark figure is absurd - don’t make some sky is falling guesstimation that’s right out of the argument of the very people that don’t want their profits infringed on. More money on moderation = Less money to buy elections and legislation with. We transitioned from print and broadcasting that, while somehow respecting free speech,, was pretty fairly regulated. Those“safe”mediums are all but dead because we allowed these social media companies to successfully lobby to avoid all responsibility for illegal content and communication on their platforms.
I’ll give you a practical example of a microcosm: Bots in online games. Bots could be functionally eliminated for the portion of the profits of any MMO. We know they could be because they were…up until the point they realized it’s more profitable to have them. Because they’re not legally compelled to get rid of bots…they’re actually incentivized to allow a certain portion of their population to be bots because it increases engagement. Why? Because we don’t regulate shit…and they companies are drunk on profits and enshitfying everything because there’s no competition in any sector any more (anti-trust, another agent topic: Activision and eventually Microsoft should have never been permitted to purchase a profitable Blizzard).
Take just advertising…let’s put everything aside and agree that social media companies should be responsible for the fucking advertising they post…just like any broadcaster. We can’t even do that. At any given moment advertisers on every social media platform are bombarding users with anonymous advertisements that break every law in the book…from copyright infringement, to election meddling, to sexually explicit material, to illegal gambling and all corners beyond. We can’t even regulate that. It’s fuckery that’s rotting the world. In real time…because we care more about Zuckerbergs bank account than our society.
Many people are underestimating how much red and purple states are going to suppress blue votes. This is without the SAVE act suppressing an unprecedented net amount of democratic votes.
Previously we were looking at a base 3 point advantage for republicans…people got used to that. It’s estimated Trumpism expanded that to about 5% the last election…going forward it could be 8 or above. The Democrats will never will again if the save act passes. It’s just numbers.
The only thing I’m talking about is social Media companies moderating their platforms so there’s zero tolerance on illegal communication. The currently legislated laws in a region.
Currently, in North America, social media companies moderate themselves…typically with user reporting and automation. There’s an hours long gap between infractions and action.
This could be eliminated with proper moderation. I believe this is the bare minimum. The current status quo is the Wild West…children and adults alike are bombarded with illegal content each time they use social media, or the internet at large.
On one hand you want government mandated tools…on the other you want unlimited freedom.
I just want the content that’s posted on social media platforms to be legal. I don’t know why you’re babbling about restriction of freedom. You want illegal content to be…legal?
What’s annoying is that it works. That’s the world we live in.
We have either boomers who are too plugged into crime shows or whathaveoyou eating up this nonsense…or conspiracy nuts all over the place looking for a fix.
Same shit (even if it’s different) is going on in the Luigi case. Just because they dropped the death penalty doesn’t mean he’s going free.
The way I understand the evolution of bullet science is that the days are gone when bullets can be used like finger prints because too many cases have been overturned.
The way we should be thinking about this type of forensics is that it can link a bullet to a family of guns ie “this could have been the weapon or this couldn’t have been the weapon” - it’s almost never definitive, in the affirmative.
The headline here could also be “bullet investigation does not rule out Robinson as the shooter”.
If you’re going to report on bullet analysis, you need to also report on the evolution of the science. Which is to say, the way we understand bullet analysis from a show like CSI or something is incorrect. Bullets simply can’t be linked to firearms like fingerprints can be linked to people.
The way I understand the science is that bullet analysis tells us if a bullet is from a family of guns, not a specific gun like it was used in the past. Bullet analysis and be used to rule out a weapon, not to directly tie one to a crime. This article doesn’t tell us the gun was eliminated like it suggests.
Freedom.
It’s intimidation. It’s headlines for the faithful and ignorant.
Never mind that every single chain in the “terrorist conspiracy” is nonsense…that’s just details. The message is that protest gets jail time.
The legality doesn’t matter…whether the sentences are overturned or reduced or kept in place by activist judges…the message to the faithful and ignorant is that “antifa” is a terrorist movement.
Sounds like you’ve built yourself quite the straw man.
They basically mean free like Saudi Arabia is free. ie rich Saudi’s are “free” to replace the Shiahs.
It’s tough to get news out of Iran…but I’m dubious we should be getting it from a Saudi.
It’s my understanding that this dude was using his Canadian citizenship to spy for American companies. The other Michael even got a settlement from our government because he said he was detained for his association with this guy.
So yeah…I don’t find it surprising that a spy says China is going to spy….he’d know.
More right wingers aren’t a solution for right wing problems. All they’re going to do is give the hard right cover.
Spare us the lazy trolling.
What’s happening right now is leftist gains are being rolled back…as they have been for these decades you speak of.
Do you think it’s because leftists “failed to get traction”, or because the previous gains were so successful too many people forgot where they came from?
This seems more like an “if Trump can get away with it, so should I” moment than an Al Franken moment.
Right? He tried. Got desperate when his poll numbers tanked…but he tried.
At the end of the day it’s shitty to acknowledge…but Canadians just might not be ready to elect a Sikh dude federally…even if I would argue he’s the best leader I’ve seen in my lifetime. He actually got something in exchange for his leverage, too. Maybe that didn’t even matter because leftists jumped on the Carney train en masse because of what’s going on down south and how obvious is was Pollievre would sell out souls to him. Little did they know Carney was going to saddle us with austerity that gives conservatives a wet dream…if it were a conservative (by party) doing it.
Lol, the left can be so brutal.
Singh wasn’t anywhere near that bad :)
You see illegal content all the time, even if you won’t acknowledge you do.
They should be compelled to do whatever it takes so illegal content isn’t available on their platforms. There’s absolutely no reason user posts, and especially advertisements need to be available instantaneously. This notion that doomscrolling in real time or that being able to broadcast your message to the entire world instantly is somehow comparable to freedom of speech or speaking in a town square is absurd.
I couldn’t give a single rats ass how much it costs. And no…your ballpark figure is absurd - don’t make some sky is falling guesstimation that’s right out of the argument of the very people that don’t want their profits infringed on. More money on moderation = Less money to buy elections and legislation with. We transitioned from print and broadcasting that, while somehow respecting free speech,, was pretty fairly regulated. Those“safe”mediums are all but dead because we allowed these social media companies to successfully lobby to avoid all responsibility for illegal content and communication on their platforms.
I’ll give you a practical example of a microcosm: Bots in online games. Bots could be functionally eliminated for the portion of the profits of any MMO. We know they could be because they were…up until the point they realized it’s more profitable to have them. Because they’re not legally compelled to get rid of bots…they’re actually incentivized to allow a certain portion of their population to be bots because it increases engagement. Why? Because we don’t regulate shit…and they companies are drunk on profits and enshitfying everything because there’s no competition in any sector any more (anti-trust, another agent topic: Activision and eventually Microsoft should have never been permitted to purchase a profitable Blizzard).
Take just advertising…let’s put everything aside and agree that social media companies should be responsible for the fucking advertising they post…just like any broadcaster. We can’t even do that. At any given moment advertisers on every social media platform are bombarding users with anonymous advertisements that break every law in the book…from copyright infringement, to election meddling, to sexually explicit material, to illegal gambling and all corners beyond. We can’t even regulate that. It’s fuckery that’s rotting the world. In real time…because we care more about Zuckerbergs bank account than our society.
It’s got to be The Matrix.
These red pill people view “liberals” as the Matrix they’re escaping…when the film explicitly says the opposite.
Do red people know that both of the writers are trans…?
Get the F off of x.
Many people are underestimating how much red and purple states are going to suppress blue votes. This is without the SAVE act suppressing an unprecedented net amount of democratic votes.
Previously we were looking at a base 3 point advantage for republicans…people got used to that. It’s estimated Trumpism expanded that to about 5% the last election…going forward it could be 8 or above. The Democrats will never will again if the save act passes. It’s just numbers.
The only thing I’m talking about is social Media companies moderating their platforms so there’s zero tolerance on illegal communication. The currently legislated laws in a region.
Currently, in North America, social media companies moderate themselves…typically with user reporting and automation. There’s an hours long gap between infractions and action.
This could be eliminated with proper moderation. I believe this is the bare minimum. The current status quo is the Wild West…children and adults alike are bombarded with illegal content each time they use social media, or the internet at large.
What you’re saying is incoherent.
On one hand you want government mandated tools…on the other you want unlimited freedom.
I just want the content that’s posted on social media platforms to be legal. I don’t know why you’re babbling about restriction of freedom. You want illegal content to be…legal?
What’s annoying is that it works. That’s the world we live in.
We have either boomers who are too plugged into crime shows or whathaveoyou eating up this nonsense…or conspiracy nuts all over the place looking for a fix.
Same shit (even if it’s different) is going on in the Luigi case. Just because they dropped the death penalty doesn’t mean he’s going free.
Yes, and…
The way I understand the evolution of bullet science is that the days are gone when bullets can be used like finger prints because too many cases have been overturned.
The way we should be thinking about this type of forensics is that it can link a bullet to a family of guns ie “this could have been the weapon or this couldn’t have been the weapon” - it’s almost never definitive, in the affirmative.
The headline here could also be “bullet investigation does not rule out Robinson as the shooter”.
If you’re going to report on bullet analysis, you need to also report on the evolution of the science. Which is to say, the way we understand bullet analysis from a show like CSI or something is incorrect. Bullets simply can’t be linked to firearms like fingerprints can be linked to people.
The way I understand the science is that bullet analysis tells us if a bullet is from a family of guns, not a specific gun like it was used in the past. Bullet analysis and be used to rule out a weapon, not to directly tie one to a crime. This article doesn’t tell us the gun was eliminated like it suggests.