Time Magazine Admits Pre-Election Manipulation for “Democracy”

[Tombs]

Bribes are free market.

I guess all sales, coupons, money back offers, and low interest financing plans are against the principles of the free market.

 

[jamil]

I guess all sales, coupons, money back offers, and low interest financing plans are against the principles of the free market.

Whew. Glad that’s in purple. Would hate to think you think a sale at Walmart is the equivalent of bribing a person with the power of the state to use that power against its competitors.

 

[Goodguy]

It would help to read the entire article versus just the part quoted. Context is everything.

 

[Steell]

If tax dollars pay for it then the constitution should be upheld by those companies. If my tax dollars are going towards Twitter, making it a government funded entity, than Twitter should have to allow free speech and shouldn’t be able to ban the account of the president, or label anything as “misinformation”. They can’t have their cake and eat it...

Please explain exactly how your tax dollars are supporting Twitter. No one owns the internet, although some portions are privately or governmentally owned (I own my servers and network). As far as I can tell the US Government owns no part of the internet. Arpa/Darpa did fund a lot of the early research, although certainly not all, and Arpa/Darpa did own the original backbone, later sold to private interests. The web (www) is not the internet, it is a protocol that runs on top of the internet. If I know the IP address of the computer to which I want to connect I can do so directly from the command line, no browser needed.
Below is a link to a book written by some of the early researchers that designed the arpanet/internet that explains the whole thing in terms the average person should grasp.

Brief history of the net

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Please explain exactly how your tax dollars are supporting Twitter. No one owns the internet, although some portions are privately or governmentally owned (I own my servers and network). As far as I can tell the US Government owns no part of the internet. Arpa/Darpa did fund a lot of the early research, although certainly not all, and Arpa/Darpa did own the original backbone, later sold to private interests. The web (www) is not the internet, it is a protocol that runs on top of the internet. If I know the IP address of the computer to which I want to connect I can do so directly from the command line, no browser needed.
Below is a link to a book written by some of the early researchers that designed the arpanet/internet that explains the whole thing in terms the average person should grasp.

Brief history of the net

So are you telling me Twitter hasn’t gotten subsidized by the federal government?

 

[foszoe]

So are you telling me Twitter hasn’t gotten subsidized by the federal government?

Um I think he was asking for evidence from you that they are?

 

[Ingomike]

That's a great explanation thompal. Seems to me like maybe the difference might be paying for a service? We pay for phone service but not for social media? We pay for cable, but not necessarily for the local channels that are available for free over the air though... but those channels are restricted to what they can do by the FCC. (shrugs)

I agree thompaul had a great explanation.

Social media is not free, they take your data, that is a different currency, but a payment nonetheless.

You pay for local TV OTA by watching commercials. Because they use the public airwaves they have certain obligations to the public prescribed by the FCC.

You pay twice for local channels you get on cable when the station collects retransmission fees from the cable company. (You know, those fights, usually during the end of football season that cable or DirectTV are losing the channel?)

 

[Steell]

So are you telling me Twitter hasn’t gotten subsidized by the federal government?

I asked first

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Um I think he was asking for evidence from you that they are?

I believe the very first line was “please explain exactly how your tax dollars are funding twitter” The rest of his comment wasn’t a question at all, and was instead “informing” me that nobody owns the internet.

I replied with “are you telling me Twitter hasn’t gotten subsidized by the federal government?” Which not only answered his question but asked if that’s what he was trying to imply.

 

[Steell]

I believe the very first line was “please explain exactly how your tax dollars are funding twitter” The rest of his comment wasn’t a question at all, and was instead “informing” me that nobody owns the internet.

I replied with “are you telling me Twitter hasn’t gotten subsidized by the federal government?” Which not only answered his question but asked if that’s what he was trying to imply.

I am forced to assume that you believe Twitter is subsidized by the federal government, since you refuse to answer clearly.
That seems to me to indicate that you believe the theory promoted by Josh Hawley that every platform and website that allows posting is subsidized because of Section 230 of the CDA. Since Section 230 is based on the First Amendment you really need to understand both in order to have an intelligent conversation so I have listed two links below that will explain them to you in non-legaleze. Unless you are one of those that put their fingers in their ears and go "La la la la la I can't hear you because I know what I know and don't care about any stupid facts", in which case you should ignore me and I'll ignore you.

First Amendment
CDA 230

 

[Steell]

And so ends my annual foray into the political forums of INGO, maybe next year

 

[jamil]

I believe the very first line was “please explain exactly how your tax dollars are funding twitter” The rest of his comment wasn’t a question at all, and was instead “informing” me that nobody owns the internet.

I replied with “are you telling me Twitter hasn’t gotten subsidized by the federal government?” Which not only answered his question but asked if that’s what he was trying to imply.

Is twitter subsidized by the Federal government, and if so, how? Exactly three reasonable answers to that. Yes, here's how. No. And I don't know.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

Is twitter subsidized by the Federal government, and if so, how? Exactly three reasonable answers to that. Yes, here's how. No. And I don't know.

I don’t know honestly. I know Facebook, Amazon, and Google has... I assumed Twitter would as well since those companies are basically the same

 

[Ingomike]

Is twitter subsidized by the Federal government, and if so, how? Exactly three reasonable answers to that. Yes, here's how. No. And I don't know.

If no other way they are subsidized by 23 protections...

 

[CampingJosh]

There is I think... @Kutnupe14 @CampingJosh @JeepHammer

Just came across this. I don't think it ever alerted me. If it did, I somehow lost it.

Ever since the heckler's veto got my thread with jamil locked, I've been a lot less active. It's quite clear that a bunch of you all want the political discussion to be an echo chamber and seem to take personal offense any time someone tries to bring a different perspective into a discussion.

Don't misunderstand this as a complaint; the mods can certainly choose to shutdown whatever discussion they want. I'm just explaining why I didn't come across this thread for almost a week.

Now, what is it you're wanting me to discuss?

 

[jamil]

If no other way they are subsidized by 23 protections...

That's not a subsidy.

 

[jamil]

Just came across this. I don't think it ever alerted me. If it did, I somehow lost it.

Ever since the heckler's veto got my thread with jamil locked, I've been a lot less active. It's quite clear that a bunch of you all want the political discussion to be an echo chamber and seem to take personal offense any time someone tries to bring a different perspective into a discussion.

Don't misunderstand this as a complaint; the mods can certainly choose to shutdown whatever discussion they want. I'm just explaining why I didn't come across this thread for almost a week.

Now, what is it you're wanting me to discuss?

I have to admit. I've never been as pissed at INGO as I was over that.

 

[BugI02]

I have to admit. I've never been as pissed at INGO as I was over that.

Hold our collective beers!

 

[Hawkeye]

Back to "plinking"?