Melllvar @ charonn0 @startrek.website

*Seer* of the tapes! *Knower* of the episodes!

---

Read more

Posts

3

Comments

1,270

Joined

2 yr. ago

I feel like you're arguing a point I haven't taken a position on. I'm only saying that arrests like this seem insane to an American sensibility.

The conservatives gave it the power to prosecute people for protesting climate change and made it inadmissible evidence for them to explain the reasons for their protest

But I will say that changing the law like that is also insane to an American sensibility.

It's less about thinking she shouldn't be punished for her speech, and more about thinking that the state shouldn't have the power to punish speech. To quote Thomas Jefferson, "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."

I'm not upgrading because I don't trust Windows 11. Not that 10 has my confidence, of course, but 11 seems worse.

It's not a question of what speech I think should be allowed, but rather a question of what powers I think the state should have.

Windows 95 had to change the time zone selection map because of disputed borders.

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20030822-00/?p=42823

I'm not confusing them. But I'm also not a fan of using the power if the state to punish people I disagree with, even if they say vile things. Such power will inevitably be abused, turned against me, etc.

It's safer in the long run to preserve free speech and expression, even if it means people get away with being asshats.

I don't think that would do a lot in terms of protecting unpopular speech.

Well that brightens my day :)

The problem is in who decides what speech should be punished.

The value of the DNS is that we all use the same one. You can declare independence, but you'd lose out on that value.

Fuck social media, why doesn’t everyone have a geocities page with a webring that links to their angelfire page and guestbooks and ICQ and stumbleupon KIDS NEED TO STOP HAVING A DIFFERENT INTERNET EXPERIENCE THAN I GREW UP WITH!”

This, but unironicly!

💩

WTF were they expecting to happen?

Doesn't this contradict the premise of the question?

Point of order: the Constitution doesn't set the number of justices, it gives that power to Congress.

That doesn't seem like a reasonable or well thought-out idea.

What do you suppose the president has the power to do in this case?

Laws Broken by Indiana Jones