75dvtwin

10 ms·

31.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Eloquent. You are probably aware then, that conservatives think of the Democrats as the global Cartel, consisting of - bribe takers and money launders - protege of sexual predators - systemic racists And that claiming that this is a party,
32.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
because we do not want corporations claiming protections that they do not deserve. Editorializing content by twitter's own employees, or by crowd-sourcing, is still editorializing. So Twitter and FB, HN and others are publishers, not p
33.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
and their view on censorship: https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/if-unreliable-is-the-issue-why...
34.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
I think the outrage is not at NY Post for posting the alligations or at ABC townhall anchor for ignoring them. Instead the outrage is about Twitter, FB and others who claim to be 'platforms' and therefore protected under section 2
35.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
I hope this incident of systemic bias by Twitter and others, will not just end in 'amplification' of the story. I hope the result of this outrage, is that the companies that claim to be 'plaforms', but instead are syst
36.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
everyone at twitter or FB content moderation roles, or execs -- think they are ethics luminaries and moral compases of the 21st century. Sort of the Supreme Court of ethics and moral judgment. Really the problem is not with liars, it is wit
37.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
I think the issue with social networks like Twitter and other, claiming legal benefits of 'platforms' while acting as publishers and crowdsourced-publishers. It is like having a for-profit business that claims tax umbrella of a ch
38.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Ok, as a former New Yorker, what do you think about this explanation of the outrage with the behaviour of social networks executives: https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/if-unreliable-is-the-issue-why... ?
39.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
> Social media sites are legally entitled to censure things they disagree with That's right. But when they do that, can they claim that they are a 'platform' and not a 'publisher' ? If paulX is a for-profit-bus
40.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Of course it is. So is a 'for-profit business' is a perfectly fine thing. But having a for-profit business using tax code for a non-profit charity -- would be criminal. So why does 230 or other shields apply to Twitter or HN or FB
41.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
a platform, assumes 'neutrality'. If it is not neutral, it is not a platform.
42.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
You are right. We must not have individual-editorial, or crowdsorced-editorial social networks, treated as 'neutral platforms' when it comes to political or legal content -- basically anything that directly affects political cand
43.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
This is exactly right. If FB, Twitter or HN apply their Terms of service rules selectively (or that the ToS are biased against specific political candidates or groups or opinions) -- then they are not a neutral platform. If they are not a n
44.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Well, I propose that FB and HN either apply ToS rules uniformly, or stop claiming a 'neutral platform' status. Another analogy: if you are a for-profit business, do not claim Charity status. It is criminal if you do.
45.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
If HN, or Twitter or FB, selectively apply their 'Terms of Service' in a way that reduces access to pro-conservative positions -- then they are not a neutral platform. If they are not a neutral platform, they cannot claim shields
46.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Well, I think you underestimate the gravity of this. A thoroughly corrupt money laundering Biden family machine (which also involves children of other previously high profile politicians) -- may become the presidential family of US. And the
47.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
It has to be treated as criminal negligence when a platform applies its 'Terms of Use' or rule of conduct, selectively. I think that will solve the problem. Today, HN or Twitter can, selectively, diminish visibility of pro-conser
48.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
> Why on earth would any company encourage its employees to speculate and talk freely, when doing so would get them into legal/PR trouble. There is another view, and another analogy. A monopoly that closes ads accounts without any
49.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Yes, The manipulative propagandists controlling Merriam-Webster are shamefully poisoning [1], in real-time, the online reference materials, to give legitimacy to the slander by Senator Mazie Hirono [2] of US Supreme court nominee. [1] h
50.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
>But the reason I wanna mainly talk about is that engineers, developers, whatever you want to call them ... > I think great UX designers just grew up naturally having much more empathy towards others and having a much better ability t
51.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
Another view, is that applied science that impacts policy making, has become utterly corrupt, and largely unreliable. The transformation happened in the last 30 years or so. Deeply flawed academia reward system [1], combined with accountabi
52.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
> What should it be based on? Should academics be judged on performance? If so, how? Thank for the question. It is, indeed, easier to criticize rather than offer constructive suggestions. Here are my thoughts on the reward system: - I wo
53.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
And this is it. A reward system based on paper publishing and conference speeches is fundamentally broken. There are really no built-in checks and balances, unless commercial interests care for it to do a 'check', that benefit th
54.
USPTO: Journeys of Innovation Series: Marian Croak(uspto.gov)
1 points by 75dvtwin 6y ago|0 comments
55.
Jack Sharp works of amateur photographer circa 1950-1970(jacksharp.co.uk)
93 points by 75dvtwin 6y ago|57 comments
56.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
that's great, of course. But do fathers get same treatment in courts, during custody disputes? Property separation disputes, statistically ?
57.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
I would think of the economic persecution of individuals as powerful weapon. just like with any weapon: - some will call it 'great equalizer'. Meaning that a victim no matter how small and physically weak, can still fight off a nu
58.
US Patent Trials and Appeals board inconsistent with KSR case(ptabwatch.com)
1 points by 75dvtwin 6y ago|0 comments
59.
19 Aliens charged with voter fraud in North Carolina(ice.gov)
2 points by 75dvtwin 6y ago|0 comments
60.
by 75dvtwin 6y ago
> assuming when things eventually open up again more in say max a year or two, they will need/want to be back in the city? Well, I do not have a huge sample to drive any conclusions. But I know a couple whose adult children live in

More ›