They always wrap it up around protecting the Children..Total lies and deception. Start making a lot of noise. If America is silenced. The Whole World will be silenced. WWG1WGA
Exactly. How do you protect children if a child can simply enter an older year of birth? You use digital ID or AI facial recognition to see who's truly a child. From there, you have no more privacy online, and two years later that anti-communist shitpost you made gets you in front of a firing squad.
Q told us we're going to get an "Internet Bill of Rights".
These discussions have to occur if this is going to happen. Section 230 is a deeply flawed statute the way it is currently practiced. I'll wait and see where this goes before forming a judgement.
Curious...if it is logical to create domain such as .gov or .org to limit content to specific uses why not create .xxx and force all such content to use a common extension. It would make it simple to filter at the parental control level at that point. You go after the publisher not for publishing but rather for not publishing with the right extension. Thoughts?
That these clowns should even abuse the legislative process and the first ammendment should be enough to bounce their butts outta DC back to their districts for the rest of their lives
Since they use children as an excuse - I suspect they may want to require everyone to be authorised and identified by ID (to “verify age”) to use the Internet
… so the Thought Police knows who they should go after.
They only mention repealing 230, the section that shields platform operators (e.g., Facebook or Craigslist etc.) from being held responsible for the speech of its users.
They ask for a week to debate reforming it, but haven't presented a bill yet. Obviously if they're responsible for platform users' speech, they'll censor a lot more.
I remember all the talk about reforming it during 2020 when the patriots were deplatformed en masse, but I never read that linked guidance before. Thanks for the reminder. It's good. Will make it easy to prosecute Roblox, among other things.
I'm sure there is more at play. If this tracks their proposal, it'll be a good thing. Having the lefties introduce it will help shake out some rinos, or it could be a successful bipartisan model. Some Republicans signed the letter. Maybe Fetterman will even shine. I guess we'll have to wait until February to find out.
Do not even have to ask on this. Just take a moment to look at what other countries are doing/have been doing and you will find, they have already implemented restrictions to "keep the children safe". Now, look to Australia who just made it illegal for minors to access but, we know the young ones will be quick to start finding ways around it all so, I am sure they will be getting even stricter about it soon enough. When the "whole world of usual suspects" are suddenly implementing something same like within the same time frame... it is a global push IMO.. and I cant believe I am saying this.. I agree with Miss Lorenz on this one.
Dick Durbin and Blumenthal are co-sponsors. That's all we really need to know.
And those worse-than-useless "republicans" who dared to sign their name on the same sheet of paper as those commie-democrats can go to hell too.
This post comes from TAYLOR LORENZ, one of the biggest Commie Democrats there is.
...also kinda weird for someone so concerned about "free speech" to disable the public's ability to comment on her social media posts.
Dick Turban, that faggot
They always wrap it up around protecting the Children..Total lies and deception. Start making a lot of noise. If America is silenced. The Whole World will be silenced. WWG1WGA
The only people children need protection from is them.
Exactly. How do you protect children if a child can simply enter an older year of birth? You use digital ID or AI facial recognition to see who's truly a child. From there, you have no more privacy online, and two years later that anti-communist shitpost you made gets you in front of a firing squad.
Exactly!
"the keeeds, gotta protect THE KEEEEEDS!!!!
@TaylorLorenz loves Mamdami:
https://x.com/TaylorLorenz/status/1985805661729382847
and hatesthe USA so much, she doesn't think it has the "right to exist":
https://x.com/TaylorLorenz/status/1923584041258975431
BE CAREFUL WHO YOU FOLLOW.
Q told us we're going to get an "Internet Bill of Rights".
These discussions have to occur if this is going to happen. Section 230 is a deeply flawed statute the way it is currently practiced. I'll wait and see where this goes before forming a judgement.
Curious...if it is logical to create domain such as .gov or .org to limit content to specific uses why not create .xxx and force all such content to use a common extension. It would make it simple to filter at the parental control level at that point. You go after the publisher not for publishing but rather for not publishing with the right extension. Thoughts?
For THE CHILLRUNNN!!!
That these clowns should even abuse the legislative process and the first ammendment should be enough to bounce their butts outta DC back to their districts for the rest of their lives
Muh chilluns!!!;
Its seems to be about section 230. Any idea what the bill is actually about?
Since they use children as an excuse - I suspect they may want to require everyone to be authorised and identified by ID (to “verify age”) to use the Internet
… so the Thought Police knows who they should go after.
Problem Reaction Solution.
It would be interesting, and even useful, to see what the bill actually contains.
They only mention repealing 230, the section that shields platform operators (e.g., Facebook or Craigslist etc.) from being held responsible for the speech of its users.
They ask for a week to debate reforming it, but haven't presented a bill yet. Obviously if they're responsible for platform users' speech, they'll censor a lot more.
I don't think thats physically possible 🤣
There may be more at play:
u/#q4744
https://operationq.pub/?n=4744
https://archive.is/MPeDs
Q works in mysterious ways.
I remember all the talk about reforming it during 2020 when the patriots were deplatformed en masse, but I never read that linked guidance before. Thanks for the reminder. It's good. Will make it easy to prosecute Roblox, among other things.
I'm sure there is more at play. If this tracks their proposal, it'll be a good thing. Having the lefties introduce it will help shake out some rinos, or it could be a successful bipartisan model. Some Republicans signed the letter. Maybe Fetterman will even shine. I guess we'll have to wait until February to find out.
Every democrat sponsored bill has poison pills embedded throughout.
they want to “protect children” from info that challenges official narratives,
but have no problem stocking the childrens section of the library with LGBT trash
I never thought I'd see the day where Taylor Lorenz would advocate for free speech.
Do not even have to ask on this. Just take a moment to look at what other countries are doing/have been doing and you will find, they have already implemented restrictions to "keep the children safe". Now, look to Australia who just made it illegal for minors to access but, we know the young ones will be quick to start finding ways around it all so, I am sure they will be getting even stricter about it soon enough. When the "whole world of usual suspects" are suddenly implementing something same like within the same time frame... it is a global push IMO.. and I cant believe I am saying this.. I agree with Miss Lorenz on this one.
If Graham is behind the push, then I am against No Names lover boy!