patrick.net

solution - don't have any damned social media accounts!!!!!!!

Yes! Or use alternatives. But it's too late now. We're already past problem, and wrong reaction that many here had. Now we're about to get the solution.

I sincerely hope many of you see this as an opportunity to think through your beliefs more carefully, as poorly thought out, false dichotomy reactions, are clearly leading us to slavery.

Bd6r says

solution - don't have any damned social media accounts!!!!!!!

This.

NuttBoxer says

Yes! Or use alternatives.

Such as Patnet!!!

NuttBoxer says

wrong reaction that many here had. Now we're about to get the solution.

I sincerely hope many of you see this as an opportunity to think through your beliefs more carefully, as poorly thought out, false dichotomy reactions, are clearly leading us to slavery.

Also yes!
People here bitch and moan about evil social media while earning money for them by having Facesucker etc accounts. Same as whining about wokeization of professional sports while watching games or even worse going to them.

The actual solution is to decentralize this entirely.

I live and work in Silicon Valley, and I can say with certainty that the purpose of "social media" is social control. They aren't even hiding it now. The purpose is to restrict who you can talk to, and what you can talk about.

You can't talk to Russians, or Libyans, or Syrians, etc etc etc. WHY do you think that is?

YEARS ago, you'd see things actually "go viral" - WIKPEDIA's articles went viral. But not anymore. Social media is SPECIFICALLY designed control the population.

This new act is entirely unconstitutional, it's not enforceable, but I guarantee that Facebook, Twitter, and Google will enforce it, whether it's passed or not. They, in fact, probably wrote this bill.

I don't want Social media to be forced to reinstate users. I just want their protection that isn't afforded under print publications, removed.
I don't want them shielded by 1st Amendment while denying it to those they deem don't deserve it. In other words if they want to ban a user, they surely can. But if they say they banned them because they were White Supremacists, then they should be sued so fucking hard, the Duck Dynasty Clan owns fucking Google.

Tenpoundbass says

I don't want Social media to be forced to reinstate users. I just want their protection that isn't afforded under print publications, removed.
I don't want them shielded by 1st Amendment while denying it to those they deem don't deserve it. In other words if they want to ban a user, they surely can. But if they say they banned them because they were White Supremacists, then they should be sued so fucking hard, the Duck Dynasty Clan owns fucking Google.

So who should be the one to fix above scenario?

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1645019136920293376?ref_src=patrick.net

@TulsiGabbard
The Restrict Act not only bans Americans from using TikTok, it is a Patriot Act 2.0 for the Internet. It would give the govt unfettered access to all the data on our computers, phones, security cameras, internet browsing history, payment applications and more. It throws the Freedom of Information Act out the window, cannot be challenged in court, and criminalizes the use of a VPN with up to 20 years in jail and $1M fine.