Lovely QATAR Airways

Quote: Gandler

I don't agree with it.

But, if you don't see the difference between a private company restricting use on its platform, and a country banning websites and categories, you need to research the differences more.

You (Americans anyway) have a right for free speech without restrictions from the government. A private company can restrict your buisness if they don't like your speech (free association).

I have had Facebook posts censored before (for posting statistics from PEW) when I was active on social media. I did not agree, so they no longer get my buisness, and I no longer use their platform (or any social media). They have a right to restrict postings (even of facts), and we have a right to not use their service.

I don't think that the internet is private enterprise with the agency's recording every keystroke. FB etc. are private enterprise in name only, with a backdoor sewed into MS.

That's what the US gripe with Huawei is about, no NSA backdoor for the US. China has the backdoor for Huawei and 5G tech.

Silly to think that Zuckerburg is anything like Howard Hughes, who was also security aligned.

Are you not aware of the ability's of the Chertoff cameras at TSA?

Quatar must have some real low brow tech if they can't sniff out a new mother onboard an aircraft.

My boss can walk by me and demand piss samples, how bout that? If we are going to point out all the wrongs of authority's? And that's just for a stupid job, and I didn't even walk out on my kids. Government gets to do what it can enforce. That is why we need freedom of the press to keep that activity in check.

It seems odd to me, that you want to go around the world policing it, killing at will, but it bothers you when the Quatari law wants to determine a mother that abandoned a baby.

Quote: petroglyph

I don't think that the internet is private enterprise with the agency's recording every keystroke. FB etc. are private enterprise in name only, with a backdoor sewed into MS.

That's what the US gripe with Huawei is about, no NSA backdoor for the US. China has the backdoor for Huawei and 5G tech.

Silly to think that Zuckerburg is anything like Howard Hughes, who was also security aligned.

It depends what you mean by "the internet". I don't know enough about the Huawei to comment on that aspect of your post.

Private websites (not internet providers) are certainly private companies who have the right to impose restrictions.

I am not a huge fan of Zuckerburg, so you will get no defense of him from me (again which is why I don't do business on that platform, which I am sure he will not miss), but he has a right to make his rules. Just like if a club wants to kick somebody out for talking a certain way or wearing a certain apparel. Can the government do it? No, but a private establishment has a right to have their own codes even if you do not agree.

A good example for those here is WOV. Wizard banned non-gambling related speech within the last year or two. I think the current rules (especially related to avatars) are overreach, but I respect the rules because I like the platform, and support the owner, so I accept them and abide by them. Wizard has a right to ban speech or aspects of speech from some of his platforms for any reason or no reason. People who don't accept the rules are free to move to many other gambling forums that do not have such rules, or if they continue to flaunt their disregard for such rules are free to be banned by the mods/admins. Its all about consensual activity.

Quote: petroglyph

Are you not aware of the ability's of the Chertoff cameras at TSA?

Quatar must have some real low brow tech if they can't sniff out a new mother onboard an aircraft.

My boss can walk by me and demand piss samples, how bout that? If we are going to point out all the wrongs of authority's? And that's just for a stupid job, and I didn't even walk out on my kids. Government gets to do what it can enforce. That is why we need freedom of the press to keep that activity in check.

It seems odd to me, that you want to go around the world policing it, killing at will, but it bothers you when the Quatari law wants to determine a mother that abandoned a baby.

I have no idea what "Chertoff cameras" are.

You signed a contract or an agreement to be subject to random urine samples at any time as a condition of employment, you are free to leave your job if you disagree.

I had a job that demanded regular nicotine tests and a nicotine free affidavit as a condition of employment (along with standard drug tests), needless to say I turned down their offer. Its all about consensual relations. If you don't agree with a policy, challenge it through your chain of command or leave. Nobody is forcing you to work there. I can't think of a job where I did not have to pee in a cup (all the way back to high school), its a pretty routine practice (nicotine tests on the other hand are absurd).

But, yes I do think America should police the world. Very few countries are able to (and even less are willing to). My problems with Qatar are extensive, and this is just one of endless examples of their backwards social polices. No, I do not want to "kill at will" , and we certainly should not declare war on Qatar (valuable ally, and needed airstrip for ME bombings). But, we should be more willing to exert pressure to modernize, right now they have full leverage over us. Qatar is not the worst country in the world, but they have a high level of influence (thanks to AJ), so they are worth taking seriously and people need to realize the power they have for their size (due to regional influence, media, and wealth), even though the whole country is about half the size of NJ in terms of landmass and 25% the size of NJ in population. Its a small country with a lot of influence and people are afraid to upset it....

Quote: Gandler

I don't agree with it.

But, if you don't see the difference between a private company restricting use on its platform, and a country banning websites and categories, you need to research the differences more.

IMHO we will see some kind of regulation here the next cycle or two. It will fall under the same as a TV or radio station must sell political ads to all comers and must sell it at regular rate card. What will probably happen is the most dominant sites will no longer be allowed to censor political speech, it will fall under the same principle though an expanded law.

Same as if NBC said they will take no Biden ads. NBC would be forced to. Twitter will be forced to do the same.

Quote: Gandler

I don't agree that BLM is a positive organization, but we are already way off topic.

In this video that you referenced as a negative example of Western Values, do you think the shooting was justified?
The dude charged the cops with a knife. What would you have done differently? Do you think if the dude was white the cops would have reacted differently?

Come on, he just condoned BLM riots and violence yet again. You expect a serious answer?