Pages


Tuesday, February 09, 2021

'See Something, Say Something Online Act' Punishes Big Tech for Not Snitching

A new bill revitalizes the war on terror's favorite slogan in service of forcing tech companies to turn over more user data to the government. The "See Something, Say Something Online Act," introduced by Sen. Joe Manchin (D–W.Va.) and co-sponsored by Sen. John Cornyn (R–Texas), is the latest attack on the federal communications law known as Section 230 as well as freedom of speech and online privacy.
-WiscoDave
Posted by

8 comments:

  1. POCCFebruary 9, 2021 at 12:10 PM

    A re-education camp is next.....

    ReplyDelete
  2. SgtBobFebruary 9, 2021 at 1:47 PM

    Kassandra Frederique -- GTR. Yep.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousFebruary 9, 2021 at 4:14 PM

    I was tempted to write in "Rebellion" on the ballot and probably will just so it shows up in my counties voting records when they are posted.

    Voting is the illusion of choice, it is the equivalent of asking a kid if he wants to wear a red shirt or a blue shirt but the little brat is going to wear a shirt, one that was already chosen FOR him. My choice was a full blown communist, or a corrupt, China-owned, John Cornyn.

    -ARC

    ReplyDelete
  4. CarlSFebruary 9, 2021 at 4:54 PM

    How many times can we report the politicians, judges, lawyers, etc., before they actually get charged and arrested?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike_CFebruary 9, 2021 at 7:17 PM

      No no, it's "How many times can we report politicians (etc.) before WE are charged with something and arrested to shut us up?"

      More seriously, I'm not sure that Section 230 is a good thing, as it is being interpreted. My understanding is that it exempts internet providers from liability over what is posted using their services (like you could not charge The American Megaphone Corporation if some asshole used their TAMC megaphone to threaten to, say, shoot a neighbor dead). Essentially the argument is that a provider is a transmittal service and not an editor. Yet Facebook, Twitter, etc, ARE indeed editing (censoring) speech on their platforms. Not only actual threats of violence, or criminal conspiracies, but also stuff they plain don't like for ideological reasons. So why should they be exempt from the consequences of, say a (mythical, entirely mythical) Antifa riot organized on FB, yet they can ban someone for posting e.g., an anti-abortion meme? I don't know what the right answer is, but I'm pretty sure that the current inconsistent and highly partisan situation is wrong.

      Delete
  5. UnknownFebruary 9, 2021 at 5:51 PM

    Cornyn is one of my Senators and with his position on approving the Electoral College vote has earned a shot at being primaried out with the next election. Unfortunately, the POS just got re-elected.

    That said, what Congress should do is remove the 230 protections. None of those companies need protection. What they need is to suffer The Will of the People.

    FPeel

    ReplyDelete
  6. AnonymousFebruary 9, 2021 at 6:41 PM

    So-called republicans like Cornyn are the reason red states turn blue.
    Just another RINO globalist dick sucker.

    ReplyDelete
  7. ronFebruary 10, 2021 at 2:25 AM

    i am life long resident of wva. 66 yrs in this rundown state. sen manchin is like biden. no one ever votes for him, but he always gets elected. go figgure
    as we say here, he is for joe manchin first, joe manchin second, democrat party 3rd, joe manchin 4th, then the state of wva 5th

    ReplyDelete

All comments are moderated due to spam, drunks and trolls.
Keep 'em civil, coherent, short, and on topic.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)