Infowars And Alex Jones Banned On Multiple Online Platforms

[MikeMcMann]

I’m sure you are one of those guys that’s just fine with Alex jones being banned because it doesn’t violate the first amendment but upset over Kaepernick not being allowed to kneel

How sure are you? Want to account bet on it?

 

[xcvbn]

It's why NN is so important. I loathe Alex Jones, but I believe in the principle that everyone should have access to the internet on a level plane as everyone else. Allowing ISPs to be content police is far more nefarious than Twitter doing it because you're effectively locking them out of the infrastructure. It's like a water provider just *deciding* that they don't like your hat and cutting off your water.

We tried telling people, but Ajit Pai and propaganda won the day. Hopefully some of the people who are irate about Alex Jones getting blocked will reconsider their opposition to Net Neutrality, because it can get far worse. Wait until hosting services see Infowars as being problematic. Twitter is just one platform, but if you get blocked upstream, you're beyond fucked.

Yeah I agree. It's funny that people are so up in arms about a single website blocking a single person, but they don't bat an eye at the fact that ISPs can completely block individuals from the internet.

It's a lot easier for a handful of ISPs to collude and block individuals than it is for millions of websites to do the same.

This country needs a very clear cut regulation/court precedent that outlines the internet as a bastion of free speech and personal liberty protected by the Constitution. At this point it's hard not to argue that what humans do on the internet is an extension to their actual person.

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

at least I can still get Louis Farrakhan's tweets about the evil Jews.

 

[xcvbn]

Wouldn't it be easy to just use a different domain(an overseas one that can't be bullied by the U.S. Government) to restart the website if they shut him out from the domain he is using?

Would probably need a janky Tor browser to access the site at that point.

ISPs and the government have the capability to lock citizens out. Look at what Turkey did in 2016- they blocked the entire country from Twitter, Facebook, and WhatsApp immediately following the supposed "coup."

 

[n...not crazy]

Hate speech is not free speech. Leave the definitions to us, m'kay? Trust us.

Sincerely,
_ Big Brother

 

[woodguyatl]

Here's the problem, though. Twitter receives tax payer money by the millions. Why should conservative tax payers give money to a group that doesn't permit them to speak ?

How does twitter receive taxpayer dollars?

 

[woodguyatl]

What 'private company' receives 300 million of the taxpayer's dollars and has no competetion? It's like saying your phone company has the right to deny you service because you watch too much MSM propaganda. Kinda crazy when the shoe is on the other foot, huh?

How does twitter receive tax dollars?

Here in Atlanta the Braves and the Falcons receive huge amount of government funding, especially with respect to paying for stadiums and in neither case do they have a local competitor. Also, unlike twitter, they require me to pay in order to attend and "use" their product.

 

[Falsedawn]

Wouldn't it be easy to just use a different domain(an overseas one that can't be bullied by the U.S. Government) to restart the website if they shut him out from the domain he is using?

The traffic still routes through your provider first and foremost before it gets to you. In a way, everything you browse (even VPN traffic) is being filtered through your ISP. The easiest way would be a DNS block, but that can be circumvented with OpenDNS or a VPN.

However, when the ISP decides they want to degrade all traffic on VPNs or that aren't utilizing their DNS servers...you have a problem. And they're unscrupulous enough to call that "service issues" instead of what it really is. If you don't have any skill in traffic analysis, you wouldn't know the difference.

To put this in concrete terms, I recently had to call my ISP and tear them a new asshole because their DNS server kept sending me interrupts to quash my usage of a VPN. How did I know that? I saw the interrupt acknowledgements from my client (and subsequent packet drops) in real time with Wireshark traffic analysis. If I were someone without the background, i'd have no way of knowing that. Even switching over to OpenDNS isn't much of a solution when they control your network at the top level.

Yeah I agree. It's funny that people are so up in arms about a single website blocking a single person, but they don't bat an eye at the fact that ISPs can completely block individuals from the internet.

It's a lot easier for a handful of ISPs to collude and block individuals than it is for millions of websites to do the same.

This country needs a very clear cut regulation/court precedent that outlines the internet as a bastion of free speech and personal liberty protected by the Constitution. At this point it's hard not to argue that what humans do on the internet is an extension to their actual person.

I see it from both sides, to be honest. On one hand, Twitter is well within their right to remove users as they see fit for any number of reasons. Their content policy is subject to their interpretation, it's not legally binding. If you don't like it, don't use the service.

On the other hand, getting banned from twitter shouldn't preclude you from any platform at all. This isn't that (since Infowars clearly still exists), but we as a country basically signed off on that being kosher. The internet isn't like platforms that can rise and fall. You can create a new Twitter (as twitter was the new facebook), but you can't just go out and lay cable for your own network. It's critical infrastructure and should be regulated and maintained as such.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

How does twitter receive tax dollars?

Here in Atlanta the Braves and the Falcons receive huge amount of government funding, especially with respect to paying for stadiums and in neither case do they have a local competitor. Also, unlike twitter, they require me to pay in order to attend and "use" their product.

Youtube receives hundreds of millions, and that is why it is impossible for them to have competitors. What's the closest thing, Vimeo? Vimeo canned Alex too, and plus, they suck compared to YouTube. It may be possible to create another Facebook but everyone is on Facebook and it has monopolized the industry.

Why is it that everybody can admit that China censoring the internet is bad but they can not admit the same when it happens in the US?

People are missing the point here: this is blatant election meddling, just like the same people meddled against Bernie. When will this become a non partisan issue?

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

I'll give you guys a chance to delete these personal attacks before I report them.

One thing I have noticed is the 'Neo Left' can not debate issues and just resorts to ad hominem attacks to stifle debate: "conspiracy theorist, nazi, idiot, low IQ, hillbilly, red neck, etc''. They hate communication and discourse, but communicating is the only way for progress, but now they are flat out silencing everyone.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

So apparently Alex incited violence, but no one can seem to find where he incited violence <Lmaoo><Lmaoo><Lmaoo><Lmaoo>



Exposing corruption is now a hate crime <45><45><45><45>

 

[ObamaPhoneLady]

Why do so many people have such a poor understanding what free speech is?

Alex is still free to say what he wants. No one has stopped that. He is not HOWEVER free to say whatever he wants on sherdog forum or other forums in contravention of their rules.

If sherdog forum decides they don't want conspiracy theory nonsense on this forum they are free to ban anyone who tries to whip it up. that IN NO WAY impacts the person banned free speech rights.

I cannot just walk into a movie theatre and start making a speech in front of the screen interrupting the movie. They can kick me out. But that is not impacting my right to free speech.

Free Speech does not mean you get to do it anywhere you want. It just means you can do it. And Jones can still say what he wants.

If said company has a monopoly on social media, then it becomes a murkier issue. Especially when said company is in bed with the government.

This is the type of thing liberals are supposed to care about and the fact you're all celebrating it proves imo that you all aren't really liberals anymore.

 

[Zod Like]

How does twitter receive taxpayer dollars?

...

https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Companies-avoid-34M-in-city-taxes-thanks-to-6578396.php

Twitter and other big firms in San Fransisco ended up not paying over $30 million in taxes every year since 2012 via a deal with the leftist city officials who wanted to keep them in-city. That difference in lost tax revenue is being fronted by the taxpayers of San Francisco - INCLUDING CONSERVATIVES.

That means the over 300,000 conservative San Franciscans had their taxes go up in order to cover Twitter's exemption.

 

[woodguyatl]

Youtube receives hundreds of millions, and that is why it is impossible for them to have competitors. What's the closest thing, Vimeo? Vimeo canned Alex too, and plus, they suck compared to YouTube. It may be possible to create another Facebook but everyone is on Facebook and it has monopolized the industry.

Why is it that everybody can admit that China censoring the internet is bad but they can not admit the same when it happens in the US?

People are missing the point here: this is blatant election meddling, just like the same people meddled against Bernie. When will this become a non partisan issue?

I'm confused. How does twitter receive taxpayer dollars? Also how does youtube receive taxpayer dollars? Please provide a link. I have tried to search for the answers but have been unable to do so.

How is this election meddling more than newspapers actually endorsing candidates? Also, Alex Jones is not a candidate so twitter is under no more required to publish his stuff than the conservative Wall Street Journal is to publish opinion pieces by crackpot liberals.

The Chinese GOVERNMENT sensors the internet. If the US GOVERnMENT tried to sensor that is would be a 1st Amendment violation BUT twitter and youtube are not the government. They are private companies.

 

[HomerThompson]

https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Companies-avoid-34M-in-city-taxes-thanks-to-6578396.php

Twitter and other big firms in San Fransisco ended up not paying over $30 million in taxes every year since 2012 via a deal with the leftist city officials who wanted to keep them in-city. That difference is being fronted by the taxpayers of San Francisco - INCLUDING CONSERVATIVES.

That means the over 300,000 conservative San Franciscans had their taxes go up in order to cover Twitter's exemption.

That doesn't have shit to do with them being a government platform, or whatever dumbass point you're making.

 

[Zod Like]

That doesn't have shit to do with them being a government platform, or whatever dumbass point you're making.

so now that you just got embarrassed and owned, you're changing the goal posts and swearing like the beta cuck you are.
LOL - you hate facts, don't you snowflake ?

 

[HomerThompson]

so now that you just got embarrassed and owned, you're changing the goal posts and swearing like the beta cuck you are.
LOL - you hate facts, don't you snowflake ?

I never said they didn't get corporate tax breaks, ass.

 

[woodguyatl]

https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/Companies-avoid-34M-in-city-taxes-thanks-to-6578396.php

Twitter and other big firms in San Fransisco ended up not paying over $30 million in taxes every year since 2012 via a deal with the leftist city officials who wanted to keep them in-city. That difference is being fronted by the taxpayers of San Francisco - INCLUDING CONSERVATIVES.

That means the over 300,000 conservative San Franciscans had their taxes go up in order to cover Twitter's exemption.

I see. So the fact that I don't go to Church (and the Catholic Church is a pedophile infested dark corner that has condoned and hidden child rape for the last 70 years at least) should allow me to not pay the increased necessary taxes to subsidize to fact they own prime properties that are exempt from tax.


Cool.

 

[Zod Like]

I never said they didn't get corporate tax breaks, ass.

no, but you asked how conservatives taxpayers were paying for twitter and I proved it do you clear as day.

why should conservatives San Fransisco have their taxes increased to cover twitter's $35 million dollar tax break if twitter is banning conservative voices ?
if the shoe (or in your case drag queen like bedazzled heels) were on the other foot, you'd be livid.

 

[ToxicShocker]

so now that you just got embarrassed and owned, you're changing the goal posts and swearing like the beta cuck you are.
LOL - you hate facts, don't you snowflake ?

The incentive operates under the premise that if the city can secure tenants like Twitter, other tech companies will follow suit and move into the area, spurring economic growth.
From your own link:

Tax breaks don't necessarily result in higher income taxs collected from individuals.

"""Supporters say that despite last year’s loss of $34 million in potential payroll tax, the city gained thousands of jobs, additional business tax revenue and general economic vitality that it would lose if companies like Twitter and Zendesk left town.

The report did not specify how much the city made in business tax revenue from Mid-Market companies in 2014, though Mayor Ed Lee issued a statement boasting the city’s “record revenues in business taxes.”

In 2013, the city tallied a net gain of $3.4 million from businesses in the tax-exempt zone.

Lee credited the tax break for helping the city “emerge from the Great Recession” and revitalizing the area.

“Our city is thriving with new jobs for businesses large and small, new investment, new housing and a renewed confidence in our future,” Lee said."""