Random Internet Shit you've come across

Ddays said:
No, neither of us are like that. But our companies thrive(d) because of that dedication. It's required in order to run a small business. It's ultimately what makes it so rewarding.

I'm not defending Musk. But I am defending him in cutting the fat out of that company. I think most of the tech companies suffer from this bloat and I do think they are staffed by a bunch of entitled pusses. Certainly not all, but just look at the reactions of some of these employees. they sound like a bunch of over-privileged coddled pansies. They certainly don't embody the work ethic you refer to above.

Can you honestly imagine running a company where your employees had unlimited paid vacation and sick days? Thats a damn nightmare!
Click to expand...
I couldn’t afford it…
 
I worked at a place where I was on salary and my boss told me I could take days off when I wanted. The catch was, all aircraft maintenance had to be up to date. I put in a lot of long days at that job.
 
Brute said:
But with all that crap, they were profitable…and in business , that’s what it’s all about….

I don’t have Snapcrap, Twit, Farcebook, or Instacrap…and personally didn’t believe Trump should have been banned from any of this junk…perhaps a tweet here or there should have been deleted…so what.

But freedom of speech is a tightrope…imagine if someone posted that you liked to look at pictures of naked children…and kept saying it repeatedly…for years, without any proof. Eventually, some people may start to belive it was true…

You could try to sue that person for liable or defamation of character. But what if that person was exceptionally wealthy, and could easily afford to defend your lawsuit…file motions and delay court proceedings and make this exceptionally expensive for you…you had to take out a second mortgage on your home to pay for it. In the meantime, your place of employment decided this wasn’t a good look for their company, and terminated your employment. Your kids at school started to get bullied, saying my dad says your dad is a pervert. One day, a depressed individual, who had lost a child to a similar pervert, decided after an evening getting personal with a bottle of bourbon decides to come to your house…with a gun.

perhaps your life would have been different if someone decided that that persons account should have been suspended…
Click to expand...
I don’t know, maybe shoot him in the face? :unsure:

Oh and since we are on what ifs, what happens if you slip, fall and die on that slippery slope?…….
 
Everything that has happened with Twitter was fully anticipated by Musk and his team. None of it is all that unusual from a business perspective, and it's certainly not outside their expectations... or the slightest hindrance to their plans (whatever they are).

Newsflash to the Left AND the right: Musk is not your friend. At the moment, his goals an objectives line up with the right. That could change next month.
 
sm31 said:
Newsflash to the Left AND the right: Musk is not your friend. At the moment, his goals an objectives line up with the right. That could change next month.
Click to expand...
^^^ This.. 100%

“Musk founded Neuralink in 2016 with the goal of developing a device that, after being implanted in a human brain, would allow a computer to translate a person's thoughts into action. He wants not only to treat brain diseases and disorders but cure them. Despite Musk's ambition, Neuralink has yet to be tested on humans.”

“Neuralink will change the world by 2022 by allowing people to upgrade their brains with machine intelligence via an implantable neural lace. With this tech, people can now upgrade their human abilities with AI and get a whole new version of themselves.”
 
There are a lot of misconceptions about the First Amendment in reference to ‘free speech’. The intent of the Founders was not to allow you to say anything you want about anybody you want. That is why Defamation of Character is a thing.

The Bill of Rights deals with limiting the power of the Federal Government. Everything in it is oriented to that purpose.

Freedom of Speech in reference to the First Amendment of the Constitution is primarily about being able to criticize the Government. Think about it, how could you ever be able to run for an elected office if you could not point out the things you disagreed with about the current person holding that office? Also how could you have any accountability of your Government if you where unable to question or criticize it?

Sadly this has been turned on it’s head and now much of what’s censored is exactly that, individuals criticizing the Government or its policies. Think about how many people were banned for questioning the vax or FJB’s son’s criminal enterprises.

The text of the First Amendmen:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
 
AZVAJKU said:
There are a lot of misconceptions about the First Amendment in reference to ‘free speech’. The intent of the Founders was not to allow you to say anything you want about anybody you want. That is why Defamation of Character is a thing.

The Bill of Rights deals with limiting the power of the Federal Government. Everything in it is oriented to that purpose.

Freedom of Speech in reference to the First Amendment of the Constitution is primarily about being able to criticize the Government. Think about it, how could you ever be able to run for an elected office if you could not point out the things you disagreed with about the current person holding that office? Also how could you have any accountability of your Government if you where unable to question or criticize it?

Sadly this has been turned on it’s head and now much of what’s censored is exactly that, individuals criticizing the Government or its policies. Think about how many people were banned for questioning the vax or FJB’s son’s criminal enterprises.

The text of the First Amendmen:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
Click to expand...
Add to this that by it's own admission, and documents acquired by FOIA requests, this administration has been colluding with social media companies to censor content that it doesn't like and you have clear first amendment violations. One could also argue that allowing elected officials, or even appointed officials to post on social media at all constitutes "government speech". This whole "it's a private company!" 1st amendment argument is going to be a legal quagmire for quite some time.
 
Last edited:
kevman65 said:
There is no such thing as "Free Speech" on social media. In this Country the only entity that guarantees free speech is the government. You have free speech on their property and their property only.
Once you hit private property (social media, this website, your neighbors back yard) you lose all your rights as they then become privileges granted by the owner of said private property.
Click to expand...
We are in trouble then since it seems our government stopped defending our free speech some time ago (if it ever actually did).
 
AZVAJKU said:
There are a lot of misconceptions about the First Amendment in reference to ‘free speech’. The intent of the Founders was not to allow you to say anything you want about anybody you want. That is why Defamation of Character is a thing.

The Bill of Rights deals with limiting the power of the Federal Government. Everything in it is oriented to that purpose.

Freedom of Speech in reference to the First Amendment of the Constitution is primarily about being able to criticize the Government. Think about it, how could you ever be able to run for an elected office if you could not point out the things you disagreed with about the current person holding that office? Also how could you have any accountability of your Government if you where unable to question or criticize it?

Sadly this has been turned on it’s head and now much of what’s censored is exactly that, individuals criticizing the Government or its policies. Think about how many people were banned for questioning the vax or FJB’s son’s criminal enterprises.

The text of the First Amendmen:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.
Click to expand...
Keyword "Congress". No mention of state or lesser governments.
 
JimLee said:
Add to this that by it's own admission, and documents acquired by FOIA requests, this administration has been colluding with social media companies to censor content that it doesn't like and you have clear first amendment violations. One could also argue that allowing elected officials, or even appointed officials to post on social media at all constitutes "government speech". This whole "it's a private company!" 1st amendment argument is going to be a legal quagmire for quite some time.
Click to expand...
The administration is not "Congress".
 
bobfriesenhahn said:
The administration is not "Congress".
Click to expand...
Legal precedent has been set numerous times that ANY government interference in free speech is a first amendment violation. A simple example would be that state governments do not have the right to outlaw protests.

"By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech and intellectual freedom also applies to state and local governments. Government agencies and government officials are forbidden from regulating or restricting speech or other expression based on its content or viewpoint."
 
JimLee said:
Legal precedent has been set numerous times that ANY government interference in free speech is a first amendment violation. A simple example would be that state governments do not have the right to outlaw protests.

"By virtue of the Fourteenth Amendment, the First Amendment's constitutional right of free speech and intellectual freedom also applies to state and local governments. Government agencies and government officials are forbidden from regulating or restricting speech or other expression based on its content or viewpoint."
Click to expand...
Does this prohibition on regulation and restrictions also include "disinformation"? That is something new that I only learned about in the past couple of years.
 
bobfriesenhahn said:
Does this prohibition on regulation and restrictions also include "disinformation"? That is something new that I only learned about in the past couple of years.
Click to expand...
Well, I think it's such a relatively new phenomena that the courts will eventually have to decide. I certainly haven't seen any laws about "disinformation" but I wouldn't put it past politicians to try, the big question (and to me the scariest part) is who gets to decide what is and what isn't "disinformation".
 
Not all of our rights and liberties are enumerated by the Bill of Rights.

Our rights and liberties are not granted to us by the government. They are granted to us by our creator, whether or not they are enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

Disinformation has been with us since the first man grunted to his buddy “Go get that wounded tiger out of the thicket. The rest of us will be right behind you.”

Disinformation is just a fancy word for “lies” and a politic way to say “propaganda”.
 
Last edited:
GP NOIR said:
Not all of our rights and liberties are enumerated by the Bill of Rights.

Our rights and liberties are not granted to us by the government. They are granted to us by our creator, whether or not they are enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

Disinformation has been with us since the first man grunted to his buddy “Go get that wounded tiger out of the thicket. The rest of us will be right behind you.”

Disinformation is just a fancy word for “lies” and a politic way to say “propaganda”.
Click to expand...
My dad used to tell me which way go while hunting…and he would say “I’ll meet you there”…then would shoot a deer. It wasn’t until years later did I realize I was the dog…
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom