Anyone else going to stop using YouTube?

[BRD@66]

He knows what I was doing, what I said in parentheses is something he had said.

10-4. S'cuse me.

 

[easy rider]

10-4. S'cuse me.

No problem, only a few of us would have known what that meant, and Younggun is one of them.

 

[F350-6]

Forgive me but what are you talking about? ....

The dark web is somewhere that illicit, illegal, or items banned from the regular web exist. As the regular web becomes more censored, doesn't it make sense that at some point, forums like this, or free discussions, or searches that don't filter the results to feed you the angle they want will only be available on the dark web that the big boys don't control?

I'm just taking your thought process further down the path than you've apparently contemplated.

 

[easy rider]

The dark web is somewhere that illicit, illegal, or items banned from the regular web exist.

A bit more then that. Some are moving to the dark web on their own volition. Members of the intellectual dark web include Jordan Peterson, Eric Weinstein and Dave Rubin to name a few.

 

[Younggun]

They aren’t on the actual dark web though. That was just a name that was coined for a group of outspoken critics that caught on. Mostly set apart by the fact that they are capable of in depth discussions and debate on the subject.

And lobsters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[easy rider]

They aren’t on the actual dark web though. That was just a name that was coined for a group of outspoken critics that caught on. Mostly set apart by the fact that they are capable of in depth discussions and debate on the subject.

And lobsters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, but they are setting up a platform outside the restrictions of other platforms.

 

[Younggun]

Yes, but they are setting up a platform outside the restrictions of other platforms.

Well, yeah.

I don’t think we’re on the same page, and it’s probably mostly me. Must have misunderstood your post. Idk, been a long week and I need sleep.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[easy rider]

Well, yeah.

I don’t think we’re on the same page, and it’s probably mostly me. Must have misunderstood your post. Idk, been a long week and I need sleep.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I rarely take it personally. No problem.

 

[easy rider]

Twitter Alternative "Parler" Sees Massive Influx Following Censorship on Twitter

 

[karlac]

Twitter Alternative "Parler" Sees Massive Influx Following Censorship on Twitter

Much more aptly named for the purpose than "Twitter".
Although the latter does live up to its connotation of a flock of crapping birds.

 

[easy rider]

I don't use Twitter, but then again, maybe society needed wholesale censoring from these oligarch tech companies to spark competition. Nobody was paying a whole lot of attention when they were censoring at a slower pace.

 

[easy rider]

Google CEO Begs Lawmakers Not To Regulate Them, womp womp

 

[avvidclif]

Wonder what size donation Twitter is going to make to Trumps re-election campaign? He's bound to have increased their readership by leaps and bounds.

 

[easy rider]

Wonder what size donation Twitter is going to make to Trumps re-election campaign? He's bound to have increased their readership by leaps and bounds.

You're kidding right?

 

[birddog]

Found the case I was looking for. I apologize for the source.


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/...t-cannot-restrict-your-access-to-social-media

“The court's opinion is that "cyberspace" is the most important place for the "exchange of views" in our society today.”

Does anyone have an opinion of what that statement infers and its implications?

 

[easy rider]

Does anyone have an opinion of what that statement infers and its implications?

Supreme Court protecting freedom of speech.

 

[birddog]

Supreme Court protecting freedom of speech.

Protecting free speech, or protecting a national defense asset?

The availability of a platform to disseminate a message fairly and equitably may be interpreted as free speech, but it's an entirely different concept and apparently a confusing one at that. Protecting free speech implies enforcing free speech and subjecting violators to the full force of our nations laws. That has never happened.

Goo, Twit, FB, et. al. all of them have admitted to business practices that violate the principles of free speech. Through selective censorship, silencing views in opposition to their social ideology. They'e done it numerous times with impunity. Censorship that conforms to their corporate ideology or to further an agenda, is not free speech. Its a mythological ideal, nothing more.

The public needs to see the "internet" and all it's permutations for what it is.

 

[easy rider]

Protecting free speech, or protecting a national defense asset?

The availability of a platform to disseminate a message fairly and equitably may be interpreted as free speech, but it's an entirely different concept and apparently a confusing one at that. Protecting free speech implies enforcing free speech and subjecting violators to the full force of our nations laws. That has never happened.

Goo, Twit, FB, et. al. all of them have admitted to business practices that violate the principles of free speech. Through selective censorship, silencing views in opposition to their social ideology. They'e done it numerous times with impunity. Censorship that conforms to their corporate ideology or to further an agenda, is not free speech. Its a mythological ideal, nothing more.

The public needs to see the "internet" and all it's permutations for what it is.

Okay, I'll put it a better way. Supreme Court protecting the 1st Amendment.

 

[easy rider]

A first experience for me this morning.

I'm not a regular viewer of Ben Shapiro, but I do watch it from time to time. This morning, although the show was on live, I decided to start it from the beginning. He was talking about a student that was in the Parkland school shooting, that advocated for the 2nd amendment, and how he was admitted to Harvard three months ago. Harvard rescinded his admission due to media smear over a private Facebook comment with friends. Anyway, I got about 7 minutes into his commentary when all of the sudden it comes up "video is no longer available". I have seen where I click on a video and it states that, but never while I was watching it. Now I wonder if it was that story that got it removed or some other story in the program. I'm not a member of Ben's show, so it could still be on the Daily Wire's website.

I'm hoping to hear what it was that got it removed, but then YouTube doesn't need much of an excuse anyway.

 

[Younggun]

Ben is about as strait laced as it gets. I enjoy his show.

Just realized I haven’t gotten any notifications for it in a long time. It’s happened with several channels I watch where I get mysteriously unsubscribed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk