Not sure but that's an indicator that you are following them.
Last edited:
Censorship
- Thread starter ppirate
- Start date
- Replies 134
- Views 7,333
Not sure but that's an indicator that you are following them.
12151791
GUNS AND COFFEE
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Correct I am on Parler. I do follow Cruz, Levin and Bongino
Last edited:
Have to agree here. Private business, no matter how big it is. I am not on Twitter, FB, or any others but I see this as the same argument of the baker who doesn’t want to make a gay wedding cake and shouldn’t be forced to. His business, their business. Don’t like it? Don’t use it. It’s not like electricity or roads, you do have a choice and it is not a requirement for basic needs.
Don’t use their crap. Starve the beast as much as you can. Don’t ever go back to the movies, limit your streaming services or eliminate them if you are able and buy local as much as you can. Yeah Amazon is convenient, but Bezos is the f’ing devil too. Just try reading some Washington Post stuff. Most small businesses have their own web sites. Buy from them. Not Amazon.
On android, download apk installer from play store. Then you can get the apkpure app manager and install that and then unstall parler. Pain but it works.
12151791
GUNS AND COFFEE
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Facebook, Twitter et al. current social monopolies will be merging with the state in 11 days - just check all the social networks henchmen that are selected/planned to join the Biden (I mean) Harris administration. The new corporate authoritarian liberal-left monoculture is going to be absolutely ruthless for free speech and liberties.
Yes, I was mistaken on the correct name.Different app. This is Parler, if you want to directly install it:
Parler for Android - APK Download
Download Parler apk 2.6.10 for Android. Parler is a news based social media and commenting platformapkpure.com
I assume that soon Parler will directly post the apk on their site.
Right, I am sure no government backroom deals are going on with big tech.
Anybody that believes this is cut and dried private business and capitalism might want to confirm just how closely their parents are related.
They are in bed with the government. There are large tax payer funded subsidies going to big tech.
Lafayette Gregory
Les-ter not Ly-Chester
So you propose to use ultra liberal Monopoly laws (Roosevelt in the 1930) To break up the private companies? A guy - even as vile as he may be- works the capitalists' game to the max, builds an empire from his hard work-and you advocate for .gov to take it away from him. work, I don't think you fully understand the don't tread on me concept and philosophy. The consumer is the one who decides if a company stays afloat. NOT Government!
Derp, especially when massive corporations lobby liberal pols for massive tax subsidies to ensure they'll never die, at least not as long as they're fulfilling their role as the propaganda wing of totalitarianism.
Last edited:
Slappy McTrigger
My Own Safe Space
@Lafayette Gregory
Defining section 230’s clause re moderation doesn’t mean the gov “takes it away” or seizes the company.
Re antitrust laws, I’m referencing all of the large corps banning together to stifle competition to the digital public square.
I’m quite aware of what “don’t tread on me” is referencing, thanks.
ETA: gov treading on you via a third-party “private company” is still gov treading on you.
Defining section 230’s clause re moderation doesn’t mean the gov “takes it away” or seizes the company.
Re antitrust laws, I’m referencing all of the large corps banning together to stifle competition to the digital public square.
I’m quite aware of what “don’t tread on me” is referencing, thanks.
ETA: gov treading on you via a third-party “private company” is still gov treading on you.
Last edited:
That baker wasn't getting special legal protection from uncle sam
Slappy McTrigger
My Own Safe Space
Correct. This is an imperfect analogy. Social media CO’s are baking their cake and refusing to too (SWIDT). They are acting as a publisher by moderating in bad faith but hiding behind 230 to avoid ramifications. Repealing 230, as some have suggested, would be a bad move IMO—effectively ending social media entirely for everyone. The right move would be to define the “in good faith” aspect of 230 as Ajit Pai has suggested. I’m on team let competition sort this out cause I’m actually on the same team as “mUh CaPiTaLiSm” here but if all of the companies with complete control of infrastructure ban together to stop competition then this would be a classic example of anti-trust.
No solutions only trade offs. As for the “it’s not electricity” it kinda is at this point. Try and run any political campaign now a days without social media and handing complete control of info back to the clowns at legacy media is a no from me dog. Also you can technically live without electricity too so...
ETA photo
Last edited:
All this talk makes me appreciate the last several years as staff here at CFF. If ya'll knew the arguments/discussions that we've (staff/owners) have had behind the scenes deciding what was "fit for print" and not being too heavy on the reins....
Last edited:
Never thought I’d see the ACLU coming to Trump’s defense, even if it is in a small way.
www.washingtontimes.com
ACLU raises concerns amid Trump Twitter ban
The American Civil Liberties Union on Friday is raising concerns about social media platforms banning users, in the aftermath of Twitter’s decision to permanently suspend President Trump.
www.washingtontimes.com
And I don’t think big tech should either. I don’t think the banks should have been bailed out in ‘08. I think .gov should stay in their own lane.
Gray area. If google were to ban me from gmail, keep, docs etc, without warning, I could very well suffer financially, and emotionally as every account, note, appointment, photos, just about everything I have, is tied to it.
I pay for storage, and as a paying customer I would expect not to be dropped without notice. But for a free service, is it wise to tie ourselves up so dependently? I understand your point but am just arguing on the side of free enterprise.
I also pay for storage and youtube (got it for cobr kai). The scary part is that any of these tech companies can do what they want and make you an un-person with the full backing of the once America government.
Just to argue for arguments sake...
(Full disclosure I am also heavily ingrained into the google storage for work and totally dependent on our connected world for content as a teacher.)
Isn’t it our own fault for becoming so dependent on these tools? What is your (or my) plan if foreign powers take down the internet or the power grid? Did life exist and flourish before we felt we had to express to the world our own narcissism on social media? Did we always trust wholly what others told us without investigating for ourselves? I think we put too much stock in the ultimate power of media (social or otherwise). I have a power button on all my devices that lets me choose when I want to be influenced by someone else’s narrative.
I try and use stand alone apps and programs for my computer and phone. I never liked the subscription model for programs on my computer. If it really comes down to it, I do have a Linux partition on my main computer.
Not just a political campaign. Try getting a small (retail) business off the ground without social media advertising and online sales. Don’t think TV ads, newspapers, and talk radio are going to cut it today.
Big difference between a grid down SHTF for everybody and being an individual cut off from services that have become part of daily living while everyone else has them.
WRONG.
Where were you during the Zuckerberg Inquisition a few years ago when Congress was raking him over the coals?
Did you totally miss the part where they flat out told him "You will fix this problem or we will fix it for you"? Maybe you did, because it was so dragged out it would have been easy to miss. But when I heard that statement, you bet your ass I perked up because I knew EXACTLY where that was going.
And that pasty-faced android sitting in front of Congress knew it, too.
Yhe censorship was coming down the pike at that point. And here we are.
The technical aspect which got Facebook, and other large social media platforms, under their thumb is the part where they branched out so much that they started providing news media as part of their services.
At that point, government regulation kicks in, like the FCC, for example. It's no longer "just a private platform".
Chuckman
Senior Member
The problem is, these "businesses" want their cake and eat it too. If they are publishing platforms then they can choose what to publish and who to censor, but if say they allow a tweet like "hang Pence" and someone followed through, then they can be criminally liable. But if they want to be a telecom, they can publish what they want, but they can be regulated like any of the telecom industries even though they are private.
They want it both ways, they want to be able to edit and publish and censor, but they do not want the regulation of the telecoms.
Edited to add, just as gun owners are hinging on "common use" as a language to not allow the infringement of MSRs, there is a reasonable argument that social media is publishing so much volume with regard to speech that to sensor any of it is, in effect, a violation.
If they want a decent lawsuit I think one way would be for a business to use Twitter, Facebook, whatever, as a means of communications and then claim that denial service is in effect discriminatory, as opposed from a free speech perspective.
They want it both ways, they want to be able to edit and publish and censor, but they do not want the regulation of the telecoms.
Edited to add, just as gun owners are hinging on "common use" as a language to not allow the infringement of MSRs, there is a reasonable argument that social media is publishing so much volume with regard to speech that to sensor any of it is, in effect, a violation.
If they want a decent lawsuit I think one way would be for a business to use Twitter, Facebook, whatever, as a means of communications and then claim that denial service is in effect discriminatory, as opposed from a free speech perspective.
Last edited:
DrScaryGuy
🌈 Loves rainbows 🌈
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Duh, you supported trump. You've been "there" for years.
The good people of the world are trying to stop you.
DrScaryGuy
🌈 Loves rainbows 🌈
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't use apple.
I currently have a samsung android. the only annoying things i get are "data connection lost" notices, which happen with great frequency where I live. I can't find a way to shut those off under default settings.
I'm considering rooting the phone and installing a custom mod that has NONE of that default crap.
DrScaryGuy
🌈 Loves rainbows 🌈
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
heh
i'm on the board of a 501 gun rights group that also has a forum
You should see the fights that have gone on just between the forum admins (appointed by the board) demanding the complete autonomy as dictated by the bylaws, and the board, who still has to ensure that everything represents the .org.
You get what you pay for.