Nate Cox

The vitriol over this topic is humorous. We charge our phones and watches daily, nobody is losing their minds over that. However, asking for the mouse to be plugged in one night a month is outlandish and absurd.

The best part is that this minor issue overshadows the real issue: the ergonomics are terrible. I have large hands and simply can not hold onto the thing properly. Narrow and flat is poor design for something you need to get a grip on to slide around.

Now if only they could add “swipe to go back” to their Linux client. Only thing keeping me off of Vivaldi these days.

Did I even watch the movie which hasn’t come out yet? I’m pretty sure I know which of us is a bot.

No.

Bring back my hopeful vision of the future Star Trek, I’m all done with this new wave.

The cult of Stallman continues to baffle me. The man is venom in the veins of the free software community and people just adore him.

I love the ideals of the free software movement but RMS is so toxic that I won’t associate myself with it while he’s tolerated.

It’s hard to have a discourse on a topic if you insist that the scope of that topic must by default be infinite.

X isn’t being threatened with litigation because they’re freedom fighters bringing literature to the huddled masses; they’re being threatened with litigation because they are a billion dollar business sustaining themselves by selling ads along with content that Brazil argues was misinformation and hate speech.

On the topic of freedom fighters bringing literature to the huddled masses: it may be moral in some extreme examples to defy the government, but there are means of doing that completely removed from the scope of microblogging on a corporate behemoth’s web platform. For example, there is an international organization who’s sole purpose is perusing human rights violations.

I don’t think it’s the responsibility of X to know the laws of every country; I expect them to respect the wishes of other countries when it is brought to their attention if they want to continue doing business there.

Also, I think we both know that the misinformation we are talking about here has nothing to do with religious beliefs. The context of the linked article clearly indicates that harmful mistruths leading to harmful actions is the subject here.

I’m not sure why it’s so tempting to think of internet content as a special entity that defies otherwise established rules. Maybe it’s simply because no special effort is needed today to get the content across the border?

Regardless, we aren’t talking about your geocities page, we’re talking about billion dollar businesses. Would it be appropriate to take your physical storefront across international borders and insist that the government there should have zero say as to what products you sell? If not, why is it appropriate to do the same with web content? X is selling content in the form of ad distribution, countries should get to decide if that content is appropriate for distribution.

I’m going to challenge your assertion that you’re not talking about what should be considered harmful by pointing out that you are loading your argument substantially by asserting that people need “help” protecting them from “harmful” censorship. Remember that the issue addressed in this thread is Brazil banning X for its promotion of misinformation and hate speech.

Censorship isn’t harmful by default. It is ok to ban people from shouting “fire” in a theater for example, because the shout may result in real harm. Now you can argue that some censorship may be harmful because of its impact on society, such as the removal of books from school hampering fair and complete education or banning research texts that expose inconvenient truths.

But, again the issue here is specifically an attempt to ban misinformation and hate speech; are you going to make an argument that these things are a positive to the community and should be defended as a moral imperative? Frankly it’s a pretty silly stance to take.

Define “harmful censorship”. I would argue—strongly—that censoring hate speech and misinformation is a public service.

I also think that any service (twitter) refusing to abide by the laws of a country (Brazil) has no place in that country.

We routinely censor content to placate China; like, all the time.

I believe each country should get to have a say in what is permissible, and content deemed unacceptable should be blockable by region. I don’t think it’s reasonable to say “well it’s on the internet so it’s untouchable” simply because the server is in another country.

Disinformation campaigns are specifically designed to undermine the reasoning capabilities of people by inveigling them into believing (usually emotionally provocative) falsehoods, turning them into misinformation conduits in the process.

It’s like saying that meth should be legal because reasonable people should just chose not to use it, ignoring the social and mental health issues that drive people to consume it against their best interest.

Sometimes the right thing to do is to cut off the head of the snake before it can bite you.

Maybe this is a regional thing, but every pizza place that I’m aware of which delivers requires the delivery driver to use their personal vehicle… and does not reimburse for wear and tear.

There’s a reason for this, they want you to download the app because you’re paying for that coupon via primary access to your personal data. Dominos isn’t just a pizza company, for a long time now they have been a data broker too.

Which I guess isn’t surprising, everyone and their mother wants to be a data broker today. It’s a good reason not to install any apps from anyone though.

Have you seen the responses here? Paints a picture on why they felt the need to defend themselves.

I just take it as an opportunity to block people these days. “You gave your kid pizza so you’re a shit lazy parent and no mitigating factor will be considered” is a pretty clear indicator that they don’t need any openings into my attention span lol.

It’s crazy that you went way out of your way to placate the internet assholes and they still found something to be insufferable about.

Sure, because it logically follows that the troll here is the “I had an irritating and unexpected behavior on windows” person, not the “Linux users are troglodytes” person.

FWIW, windows also did this to me as a part of the “oh god please oh please use Bing search on Edge” campaign.

I’m not sure how you messed up, because I was able to not blame the user for decisions made on their behalf without their consent, and I too saw this post.

Tribespeople became so addicted that Marubo leaders, fearing that history and culture — which is passed down orally — could be lost forever, they have now limited access to the internet for two hours each morning, five hours each evening, and all day Sunday.

That is still so much internet, we would probably all be healthier following that guideline.