this post was submitted on 22 Jul 2024
1176 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

71143 readers
3024 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com 65 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Maybe technically in Florida and Texas, given that they passed a law to try to stop sites deplatforming Trump.

https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess125_2023-2024/bills/3102.htm

"The owner or operator of a social media website who contracts with a social media website user in this State is subject to a private right of action by a user if the social media website purposely: ... (2) uses an algorithm to disfavor, shadowban, or censure the user's religious speech or political speech".

In May 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled to strike the law (and similarly there was a 5th Circuit judgement), but just this month the US Supreme Court vacated the Court of Appeals judgement (i.e. reinstated the law) and remanded it back to the respective Court of Appeals. That said, the grounds for doing that were the court had not done the proper analysis, and after they do that it might be struck down again. But for now, the laws are technically not struck down.

It would be ironic if after conservatives passed this law, and stacked the supreme court and got the challenge to it vacated, the first major use of it was used against Xitter for censoring Harris!

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 30 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People stupid enough to support fascism aren't smart enough to recognize that it can be used against them

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's the same stupid that thinks a dictator will preserve their freedom.

[–] macrocephalic@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

The same people who think a narcissistic billionaire is "one of them" because he says all the stupid things they're thinking.

[–] mPony@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It would be ironic

It would be Fascism.

[–] Retrograde@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Ironically, there is nothing ironic about fascism.

[–] Retrograde@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Of course not, fuck fascism, but even fascists can say ironic/moronic bullshit :)

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Even without all that messing with stuff too much is bound to clash with protections those kinds of sites have around editorialising. That is, by doing such stuff X says "we're not actually a pinboard, we're a newspaper, we're editorially responsible for what's on there", and then prosecution can come along and say "so, your newspaper published an article calling for , didn't it? That's your speech now, not speech of some random user, isn't it?".