The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Discussion of current events
neverfail
Posts: 2725
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by neverfail » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm

Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1489
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Milo » Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:26 pm

neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
So, Doc starts out this thread with outrage that Google "no longer supports free speech" but now pivots to being Mr. Worldly, who wants to inform us about "it is all about $$$".

A rather flexible narrative!

This I think all comes down to a number of right wing websites that aren't doing well; so, in the tradition of free enterprise and self reliance, the right wing is whining about it being someone else's fault and how someone else should fix it for them.

Hence my crack about socialism coming to America.

Being right wing in America is a designer label, a tribe for tribe's sake. Maybe it always was, but now; with a twice divorced president whose primary economic focus is based on subsidies and tariffs, it is firmly based in whatever he says it is!

But be sure to prclaim loudly that you're a part of it, especially the parts that contradict each other!

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 2201
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Doc » Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:06 pm

Milo wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:26 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
So, Doc starts out this thread with outrage that Google "no longer supports free speech" but now pivots to being Mr. Worldly, who wants to inform us about "it is all about $$$".

A rather flexible narrative!
Not at all as they say "Silence is golden" Especially when one viewpoint is better than two when working to make $$$.
This I think all comes down to a number of right wing websites that aren't doing well; so, in the tradition of free enterprise and self reliance, the right wing is whining about it being someone else's fault and how someone else should fix it for them.
Google and other social media sites agreed to being pass through entities in exchange for being immune from liable laws. Censorship is not being pass through entity.

Point in fact this video has been restricted to signed in users on Youtube because it "may be inappropriate to some users".

Care to explain what is inappropriate about it for some users Milo?
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1489
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Milo » Sat Oct 20, 2018 12:40 am

Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:06 pm
Milo wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:26 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
So, Doc starts out this thread with outrage that Google "no longer supports free speech" but now pivots to being Mr. Worldly, who wants to inform us about "it is all about $$$".

A rather flexible narrative!
Not at all as they say "Silence is golden" Especially when one viewpoint is better than two when working to make $$$.
This I think all comes down to a number of right wing websites that aren't doing well; so, in the tradition of free enterprise and self reliance, the right wing is whining about it being someone else's fault and how someone else should fix it for them.
Google and other social media sites agreed to being pass through entities in exchange for being immune from liable laws. Censorship is not being pass through entity.

Point in fact this video has been restricted to signed in users on Youtube because it "may be inappropriate to some users".

Care to explain what is inappropriate about it for some users Milo?
Explain. to me how ANYONE in the US is "immune from liable laws".

I just wanted this YT video without signing in



Assuming that you are referring to the only YT video on this thread.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 2201
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Doc » Sat Oct 20, 2018 1:55 am

Milo wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 12:40 am
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:06 pm
Milo wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 4:26 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
So, Doc starts out this thread with outrage that Google "no longer supports free speech" but now pivots to being Mr. Worldly, who wants to inform us about "it is all about $$$".

A rather flexible narrative!
Not at all as they say "Silence is golden" Especially when one viewpoint is better than two when working to make $$$.
This I think all comes down to a number of right wing websites that aren't doing well; so, in the tradition of free enterprise and self reliance, the right wing is whining about it being someone else's fault and how someone else should fix it for them.
Google and other social media sites agreed to being pass through entities in exchange for being immune from liable laws. Censorship is not being pass through entity.

Point in fact this video has been restricted to signed in users on Youtube because it "may be inappropriate to some users".

Care to explain what is inappropriate about it for some users Milo?
Explain. to me how ANYONE in the US is "immune from liable laws".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_se ... ted_States
The general liability risk within the United States is low but it's necessary to review the laws and decisions of all other countries because the extraterritorial application of laws to content hosted in the US is a significant concern.
Libel, defamation

1991 Cubby v. CompuServe [1] held that CompuServe wasn't the publisher and granted summary judgment in its favor.
May 1995 Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. [2] decision which held that Prodigy was the publisher, because it could delete messages.
1996 Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which states in part that "No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider". Note that this portion of the CDA was not struck down and remains law.
November 1997 Zeran v. AOL [3] The CDA protects AOL even though it repeatedly ignored a defamation complaint.
April 1998 Blumenthal v. AOL (part of the case against Drudge and AOL) held that the CDA protects AOL for Drudge's writing that Blumenthal, an assistant to the US President, had a spousal abuse background (retracted in two days) even though it paid Drudge US$3,000 a month for his columns, had editorial control and might well have been liable if it was not an online publication [4].
Lunney v. Prodigy Services Co. 94 N.Y.2d 242 (1999) held that internet chatroom provider was not considered a publisher of defamatory material posted from an impostor account due to Prodigy's passive role.
2003 Carafano v. Metrosplash.com (the Star Trek actress case) [5]. Providing multiple choice options in forms doesn't invalidate CDA immunity.

Immunity under Section 230 requires that: (1) the defendant is a provider or user of an interactive computer service; (2) the cause of action treat the defendant as a publisher or speaker of information; and (3) the information at issue be provided by another information content provider. Zeran, 129 F.3d at 330. Even completely ignoring a complaint has generally been found not to garner liability, so protection appears to be very comprehensive, though it still doesn't stop people from trying.

In 2002, the California Court of Appeal held that CDA Section 230 does not apply to distributor liability, meaning that a defendant who had notice of a defamatory statement must stop publishing it or face liability. Barrett v. Rosenthal, 114 Cal. App.4th 1379 (2002). The California Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision overturned, holding that Rosenthal was a "user of interactive computer services" and therefore immune from liability under Section 230. See also Grace v. eBay, Inc., 2004 WL 1632047 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 22, 2004) (no immunity against liability for a distributor of information who knew or had reason to know that the information was defamatory). Grace v. eBay was resolved without an opinion. The lower courts in Grace and Barrett had reached opposite conclusions when they were appealed to the California Supreme Court. In taking these cases, it was deciding to uphold or reverse Blumenthal v. AOL. Blumenthal, noted the conference report comment that the clear intent of the CDA was to overrule the state decision in Stratton-Oakmont v. Prodigy and opined that accepting distributor liability would expose them to liability that Congress had clearly intended to protect them from.

I just wanted this YT video without signing in
This video Milo:
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1699
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by SteveFoerster » Sat Oct 20, 2018 9:19 pm

neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Socialism is also the enemy of free speech, as history amply demonstrates. If you don't believe it, ask the Ladies in White.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 2201
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Doc » Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:38 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 9:19 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Socialism is also the enemy of free speech, as history amply demonstrates. If you don't believe it, ask the Ladies in White.
Google VS Duckduckgo

“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 1489
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Milo » Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:50 am

Well I think we should be prepared to see all of these companies iterate in this way: they will start out with some lofty promises and either be caught lying or succumb to financial pressure.

The future is impermanence in all things at an ever accelerating rate.

User avatar
Doc
Posts: 2201
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:09 pm
Location: Cradle To Grave

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by Doc » Tue Oct 23, 2018 11:30 am

Milo wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:50 am
Well I think we should be prepared to see all of these companies iterate in this way: they will start out with some lofty promises and either be caught lying or succumb to financial pressure.

The future is impermanence in all things at an ever accelerating rate.
Sure seems that way doesn't it?
“"I fancied myself as some kind of god....It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out.” -- George Soros

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1699
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: The "Good" Censor: Google decides it can no longer support free speech

Post by SteveFoerster » Tue Oct 23, 2018 3:26 pm

Doc wrote:
Tue Oct 23, 2018 10:38 am
SteveFoerster wrote:
Sat Oct 20, 2018 9:19 pm
neverfail wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm
Doc wrote:
Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:46 pm


As someone that spent a large amount of money on google, I can tell you this, it is all about $$$. Google is not my friend. And I have literally told Google that. Reports are that Google is refusing to do any work for the pentagon while build a special system for China that allows China to monitor all users of its users and who exactly they are makes me think that the Chinese government is paying more than the pentagon.
...and you silly Americans believe that socialism is the enemy of free speech?

:lol: :lol: :lol:
Socialism is also the enemy of free speech, as history amply demonstrates. If you don't believe it, ask the Ladies in White.
Google VS Duckduckgo
I have been giving DuckDuckGo a try.

Major issues:

Its search results are equally useful to me. When it comes to its primary function, I do not prefer Google's results to DuckDuckGo's.

DuckDuckGo is manifestly better for privacy.

DuckDuckGo is manifestly better for neutral results, which is what I wamt.

Minor issues:

I find I slightly prefer Google's UI, but that may just be because I'm still more accustomed to it from fifteen years of use.

Google Maps is more immediately useful than the maps system that DuckDuckGo ties to because it's possible to just click on things on the map and have information about them appear on the left sidebar. But I understand the tracking implications of this and can live without it.

Overall:

DuckDuckGo isn't doing anything that would make me switch back to Google, and they're providing privacy while Google sees me as an item on their store shelf. Looks like I'm sticking with DuckDuckGo.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

Post Reply