5 ms·

>After she was fired, Jones started her own online COVID-19 dashboard. But she said Saturday that she may no longer be allowed access to computers, the internet

by LocalH 6y ago

>After she was fired, Jones started her own online COVID-19 dashboard. But she said Saturday that she may no longer be allowed access to computers, the internet or other electronic devices as a condition of her release from jail pending trial. In the modern day, with so much that is online or involving computers, this should be considered unjust punishment, the likes of which should be reserved only for child molesters. Not speaking to the rest of the story. However, this by itself troubles me.

tyingq 6y ago
It is curious that this sort of restriction is possible. I don't think I could pay most of my monthly bills without the internet, for example. I assume there's also many jobs that require home internet.
sp332 6y ago
If she were providing a bogus view of the pandemic, there could be consequences for public health. That doesn't seem to actually be the case as far as I can tell, but the magnitude of the punishment seems about right for the alleged crime.
- 13415 6y ago
  I suppose you're being cynical or are joking. Literally millions of US citizens would have to be arrested if that was crime. AFAIK, she's being arrested for having accessed government databases after she had been fired, or something similar to that for which she was not fully authorized.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Providing a bogus view of the pandemic is mainstream US politics. You only get this kind of repressive treatment if you've embarrased the government, in this case the state of Florida.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- TomSwirly 6y ago
  If this were the case, the whole Trump Administration and most Republican governors would be getting decades in jail.
  - wkearney99 6y ago
    Well, we can hope, can't we?
snypher 6y ago
As a condition of pretrial release for a presumed innocent party, even _accused_ child molesters should have access to a computer.
cronix 6y ago
How about blacklisting people from monetary/financial services such as banks and credit card co's based on their political views? That goes even further. https://spectator.us/topic/financial-blacklisting-sargon-akkad/ https://spectator.us/topic/financial-blacklisting-sargon-akk... https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/02/27/financial-blacklisting-chase-bank-withdraws-service-from-independent-and-conservative-figures/ https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/02/27/financial-blacklis...
- walrus01 6y ago
  As shown by the well known bastion of unbiased, neutral, apolitical news... Breitbart. Quite honestly this looks like a toxic, bigoted individual. I'm absolutely unsurprised that some organizations choose not to do business with him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Benjamin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Benjamin
  - cronix 6y ago
    So, you don't like him, but that has nothing to do with the principle of banning people from society based on legal speech which is the point I'm making. This sort of behavior is toxic to society at large, and so are the implications. I'm glad your political views are of the correct sort....today. Oh, wikipedia.
    - walrus01 6y ago
      Think of the financial institution that chooses not to do business with him as a bakery, and sargon is a gay wedding cake. Banned from society? I was unaware that you're "banned from society" because private business Patreon doesn't want a relationship with you.
      - ZoomerCretin 6y ago
        The modern examples of a gay couple being refused service is a poor example. They can’t just go to the other financial institutions, because all of them have black-listed them. An Internet business cannot feasibly operate on cash alone. Just like any farmer in the 1800s can just go lay his own railroad tracks across the continent, every website that hosts wrongthink is equally capable of creating their own banks, payment processors, data centers, and internet connections. These businesses aren’t restaurants. They’re critical, privatized infrastructure.
mjevans 6y ago
I'd draw the line at supervised access to conversation with normal people at: if someone is in jail maybe (this is a DIFFERENT debatable topic, beyond this context) their other rights are also suspended during the sentence. Someone whom is not in jail, who is otherwise allowed to participate in society; abridging their rights of freedom of speech, expression, and discourse with others? That seems over-broad.
PicassoCTs 6y ago
IOT - so if she uses some chipped sneaker to count steps, she is in violation. Now that is a law that nobody can follow in modern times. Ring a door bell at a neighbour - you are in violation.
- PicassoCTs 6y ago
  There should be a amendments to all constitution, that no law is valid, that can not be followed by a citizen with reasonable effort. The whole copyright violation criminalization started this pattern of laws, that every citizen can assumed to be in violation of. And if everyone is in violation of such a law, the state is free to choose which violations are prosecuted and which are not. Capriciousness. One of many assaults on democracy, coming in a nice disguise.
nswest23 6y ago
yeah what is the concern that she's going to hack the president's phone and steal the launch codes? /s

by LocalH 6y ago

tyingq 6y ago

It is curious that this sort of restriction is possible. I don't think I could pay most of my monthly bills without the internet, for example. I assume there's also many jobs that require home internet.

sp332 6y ago

If she were providing a bogus view of the pandemic, there could be consequences for public health. That doesn't seem to actually be the case as far as I can tell, but the magnitude of the punishment seems about right for the alleged crime.

13415 6y ago
I suppose you're being cynical or are joking. Literally millions of US citizens would have to be arrested if that was crime. AFAIK, she's being arrested for having accessed government databases after she had been fired, or something similar to that for which she was not fully authorized.
pjc50 6y ago
Providing a bogus view of the pandemic is mainstream US politics. You only get this kind of repressive treatment if you've embarrased the government, in this case the state of Florida.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
TomSwirly 6y ago
If this were the case, the whole Trump Administration and most Republican governors would be getting decades in jail.
- wkearney99 6y ago
  Well, we can hope, can't we?

snypher 6y ago

As a condition of pretrial release for a presumed innocent party, even _accused_ child molesters should have access to a computer.

cronix 6y ago

How about blacklisting people from monetary/financial services such as banks and credit card co's based on their political views? That goes even further. https://spectator.us/topic/financial-blacklisting-sargon-akkad/ https://spectator.us/topic/financial-blacklisting-sargon-akk... https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/02/27/financial-blacklisting-chase-bank-withdraws-service-from-independent-and-conservative-figures/ https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/02/27/financial-blacklis...

walrus01 6y ago
As shown by the well known bastion of unbiased, neutral, apolitical news... Breitbart. Quite honestly this looks like a toxic, bigoted individual. I'm absolutely unsurprised that some organizations choose not to do business with him. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Benjamin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Benjamin
- cronix 6y ago
  So, you don't like him, but that has nothing to do with the principle of banning people from society based on legal speech which is the point I'm making. This sort of behavior is toxic to society at large, and so are the implications. I'm glad your political views are of the correct sort....today. Oh, wikipedia.
  - walrus01 6y ago
    Think of the financial institution that chooses not to do business with him as a bakery, and sargon is a gay wedding cake. Banned from society? I was unaware that you're "banned from society" because private business Patreon doesn't want a relationship with you.
    - ZoomerCretin 6y ago
      The modern examples of a gay couple being refused service is a poor example. They can’t just go to the other financial institutions, because all of them have black-listed them. An Internet business cannot feasibly operate on cash alone. Just like any farmer in the 1800s can just go lay his own railroad tracks across the continent, every website that hosts wrongthink is equally capable of creating their own banks, payment processors, data centers, and internet connections. These businesses aren’t restaurants. They’re critical, privatized infrastructure.

mjevans 6y ago

I'd draw the line at supervised access to conversation with normal people at: if someone is in jail maybe (this is a DIFFERENT debatable topic, beyond this context) their other rights are also suspended during the sentence. Someone whom is not in jail, who is otherwise allowed to participate in society; abridging their rights of freedom of speech, expression, and discourse with others? That seems over-broad.

PicassoCTs 6y ago

IOT - so if she uses some chipped sneaker to count steps, she is in violation. Now that is a law that nobody can follow in modern times. Ring a door bell at a neighbour - you are in violation.

PicassoCTs 6y ago
There should be a amendments to all constitution, that no law is valid, that can not be followed by a citizen with reasonable effort. The whole copyright violation criminalization started this pattern of laws, that every citizen can assumed to be in violation of. And if everyone is in violation of such a law, the state is free to choose which violations are prosecuted and which are not. Capriciousness. One of many assaults on democracy, coming in a nice disguise.

nswest23 6y ago

yeah what is the concern that she's going to hack the president's phone and steal the launch codes? /s