Battle for Section 230 - The Situation Monitoring Thread for Monitoring the Situation of the Situation Monitor's Situation Monitoring
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2018
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
Daily fucking reminder that this actually fucking exists in countries like the Philippines. Philippines is the #1 consumer of social media specifically because most of them opt in to pay for the cheapest data package that only gives them access to a handful of sites, most notably Facebook. If you want to do business or order food in the Philippines, you send a message over Facebook because no one has a real website.
These aren't fucking jokes. I have seen it first hand. Hundreds of millions of people live with this realtiy. The fact it doesn't happen overnight is not cause for celebration and forgetting about the underlying issues. Trump has put a Verizon attorney as the head of the FCC and is threatening to mutilate the CDA which built the Internet and seated the US as the first and only real choice for web-based companies. The Internet will continue to get worse, speed will get more stifled, and you are complicit.
- Joined
- May 3, 2019
We actually do its just we are now invoking Mutually Assured Destruction.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
Save the world the trouble and just shoot yourself instead.
- Joined
- May 3, 2019
Mutually Assured Destruction, not Hitler in a Bunker, I foresee section 230 being repealed and then reinstated but by then it will have been too late for twitter etc such a sad thing. It will clean up internet, as the retarded SJWs will suddenly find themselves not so eager to suck corporations dick as their fanart etc gets them in trouble, internet will be forced to disperse into smaller communities instead of centralized, which will make it harder for SJWs to subvert them all, it will stop this corporation worship and turn people against them, SJWs will be forced to calm their tits upon realisation that if they go too far we will literally burn down internet and stop them from their Yasss queen shit, it will lead growth of darknet, its going to be couple of bad years but this isnt Armaggedon but Nuclear Bombs on Japan, its better in long term. We got plan Null, its just that we dont have Xanatos tier plan that would result in us winning without struggle.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
Just wrong, just a retard. Sites like mine will be the first to go. I will close the forum day one. Twitter has jews on standby to defend their interests.
- Joined
- May 3, 2019
Sites like yours will be first to go because you are publicly identifiable, this will encourage smaller scattered communities instead of centralisation, which makes it far harder for them to subvert them all. As for Twitter, selective enforcement its time to stomp the boot on them, i know its risky since we are betting it on 2020 and basically having 4 years to fuck them over as example, which is why i think it should only be passed after elections depending on what control we have but im for it if we managed to win 2020.
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
oh so you're just a schizo retard who thinks their 10 user Lain imageboard is le resistance. Okay, good luck institutionalizing change from your .onion url, you stupid fucking faggot.
For the KMT to keep China democratic, the first step of their master plan was having their shit pushed in all the way to a small, unassailable island. Genius.
Last edited:
Boobie Bomb
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2020
Seems like the world is tumbling down all because silicon valley with their smarts thought banned Alex Jones during this election thinking nothing bad will ever happen to them.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
Looking through the replies once again justifies why all boomers and qtards deserves to die painfully.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2017
I think I speak for a lot of people here in that the fact we broadly prefer one side of politics over the other doesn't mean we think they're infallible. For example, I'm not anti-abortion and I think overturning Roe v Wade would be a political catastrophe, but I still generally prefer Republicans to win over Democrats by a small margin, partly because I don't think that will actually happen anyway. The same goes for this. It's possible one party or the other will repeal Section 230 with catastrophic consequences because they're all a bunch of old farts who don't understand the internet, but it's also possible it will just get deadlocked and nothing will happen, and since both parties want to do something similar it doesn't affect my preferences.
Of course QAnons and other Trump fanatics like Stonetoss are retards, but they're just a very loud minority. This site leans hard to the right but even here most people aren't saying this would be a good thing.
Of course QAnons and other Trump fanatics like Stonetoss are retards, but they're just a very loud minority. This site leans hard to the right but even here most people aren't saying this would be a good thing.
- Joined
- May 3, 2019
Or we might use 230 as DeathStar, just without firing at Alderaan.
ChikN10der
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
Who cares if they close down the internet at this point. It's already utterly ruined since we failed to pass net neutrality remember?
Should we extend 230 protections to the news business? Imagine how much more high quality reporting we'd get if the corporations couldn't be sued!
Should we extend 230 protections to the news business? Imagine how much more high quality reporting we'd get if the corporations couldn't be sued!
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2020
"If I shoot myself the I.R.S. can't come after me for taxes!"
The problem is the banks. 230 is what people usually call a red herring, and destroying it is retarded.
If you want 230 repealed, know this: none of the people you think will be hurt by it will care one whit that it's gone and the internet will only be a shittier place for it. Supporting it because Trump does is borderline fucking idolatry if you're letting your gay-ass love for him overwrite your basic sense of self preservation in any sense that the terms "self preservation" may apply.
It's not even an argument. It's bad and what's worse is that the other party supports it too, which should set off massive fucking alarm bells. And stop comparing it to net neutrality, it's not even remotely related as a concept save for the fact that it has to do with the internet.
The problem is the banks. 230 is what people usually call a red herring, and destroying it is retarded.
If you want 230 repealed, know this: none of the people you think will be hurt by it will care one whit that it's gone and the internet will only be a shittier place for it. Supporting it because Trump does is borderline fucking idolatry if you're letting your gay-ass love for him overwrite your basic sense of self preservation in any sense that the terms "self preservation" may apply.
It's not even an argument. It's bad and what's worse is that the other party supports it too, which should set off massive fucking alarm bells. And stop comparing it to net neutrality, it's not even remotely related as a concept save for the fact that it has to do with the internet.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
It's nice to see all the stereotypes about people using the Joker as their avatar are being proven true today. There is no plan. This isn't a gambit by 4d chess experts to threaten blowing up the internet in order to get your boogiemen to stand down. This is an angry manchild boomer who doesn't understand the internet being mad that websites are allowed to override his authority. He is not defending your rights. He's trying to massage his ego.
ChikN10der
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
Pistoleer
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2019
Ok I’ll admit I’m a borderline boomer on this shit, but having read over 230 it seems like a good thing to me and not the real problem. The problem seems to be that if I want to post wrongthink online I have to do it somewhere that allows it and those places are few and far between. This doesn’t seem to be because of 230 though, It’s more that funding these places is difficult Because of biased payment processors. Am I wrong?
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2013
In what way could you or I be sued for adding a little sticker to someone's statement? That's what originally set Trump on the path of complaining about article 230. He said something, twitter added a sticker that it wasn't an accurate statement, and Trump started talking about how he needed to repeal article 230 to rein back big tech. He never brought it up before then. Not once. If you think that's a coincidence and his true intention is to look out for you and your freedom of expression on the internet, I've got a bridge to sell you.
And no, you're right, that's not what repealing article 230 would do at all. That doesn't matter though because we're talking about a 74 year old boomer with a very limited understanding of technology, much less the internet. All he needs to know is that repealing 230 would hurt the companies he does not like. I'm not convinced that he knows or cares about the actual effect it would have.