this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2025
74 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

1911 readers
487 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]


Icon attribution | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @[email protected].

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (3 children)

I'm not going to do legal research or write a whole thesis for you.

Maybe start here for cases where freedom of speech is not absolute: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater

You can also consider that the NYT is not legally or morally obligated to publish every letter they receive. Are your first amendment rights being violated when they opt not to print your letter? No.

I don't want to discuss with you. I don't think you're acting in good faith.

I mean really "sometimes laws are incorrect" -> "fascists say that" is like satire.

[–] timewarp 0 points 4 days ago (2 children)

So your opinion on this topic is 100% based on your emotional feelings & 5 minutes of Wikipedia research, which isn't even regarding to latter precedent like in Brandenburg v. Ohio? Maybe spend more than 5 minutes getting your emotional reassurance next time. X is a private company & so they can choose to use the free speech definition according to law, which the government can't restrict... that means you can't lock up people cause they offend you & can't commit assault & murder like many people here commonly advocate for, cause to them everyone they don't like is a Nazi.

You can run away now back to your hidey hole & then go find some people that are pro-fascist & censorship that you can agree with.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You're an idiot that's not engaging with my points. I hope you die alone, removed from everything you've ever loved.

[–] timewarp 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

There it is. The vengeful & death-wishing fascist cultist. Explains why you like fascist ideals like censorship.