I have no idea what they are talking about. I have been daily driving GrapheneOS for almost two months now (coming from iPhone, but I have tested Pixels and Samsung phones on the side for a while) and there is no material difference in daily use from running the stock Pixel OS in daily use if you install Play (Services) and a bunch of apps. Of course, it is more secure and comes with no crap pre-installed, which is nice.
The only thing I have really found missing is Google Pay support for contactless payment (because Google doesn't want to allow GrapheneOS, but there are alternatives like Curve).
The convenient thing about using Claude via Telegram is that you can provide all of your private and proprietary information to US intelligence and Russian intelligence at the same time. (Telegram is not end to end encrypted.)
The idea that full grown identical twins are identical humans for purposes of analysis is also fundamentally flawed. Just because they share DNA and look the same doesn’t mean anything about their relative health, fitness, metabolic rates, etc.
Justice didn’t prevail. Afroman had to spend THOUSANDS defending himself in this bullshit civil lawsuit, and his countersuit got thrown out because police have qualified immunity.
This is after they raided his house, bashed in his door, broke his cameras, stole his money, and then didn’t charge him with a single thing (and only returned part of the money).
Which is great for him. The point being this happens to other people who aren't famous, and maybe don't want to spend their time asymmetrically fighting for themselves on social media.
How so? The positives you described had nothing to do with the courts. That's just an outcome of his own savvy. If he didn't make the video or the song, he would be out a lot of money. That's not justice, that's an entertaining person using their virality to claw back some of what was taken from them. How would that go for Joe Average?
This is the story of a guy who got sued for being harassed and had to waste years of their time and money fighting it.
This is not remotely true. Furthermore, the way people don’t get away with stuff like this is via extralegal/extrajudicial harassment, abuse, violence, and sometimes assassination (see also: MLK, Huey, Leqaa Kordia, Mahmoud Khalil, Barry Cooper, etc), so we aren’t really sure that he has gotten away with it yet.
He beat a civil defamation suit; these cops still know where he lives. Do you think the events of today made them less angry at him?
This wasn’t a 1A case, it was a civil defamation suit. He won because they failed to prove defamation, NOT because the judge threw out the lawsuit because of a violation of constitutional rights.
Separately: saying something shitty or unpopular that you disagree with isn’t someone abusing their rights to free expression. Expressing unpopular viewpoints that others consider abusive is exactly the point of such rights.
There’s a REALLY BIG reason it isn’t “freedom of expression, except for expressing racial hatred”, and it’s not because we like racism. Germany sometimes bans entire political parties that they declare unconstitutional. Now imagine that power in the hands of Trump. You can see what Putin did to Navalny for a preview.
You make it sound like Germany bans political parties every other year.
Germany formally only ever banned two parties:
- Socialist Reich Party (SRP), 1952
- Communist Party of Germany (KPD), 1956
For context: The Federal Republic of Germany was founded in 1949.
There are current discussions about banning - or evaluating a potential ban of - the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD). If the ban went through (I think it won't), it would be the first in 70 years.
That’s just an example. Germany’s censorship (a violation of human rights to peaceful free expression) doesn’t just stop at political parties.
The fact that they are even discussing a ban of AfD shows how ridiculously dangerous such powers are when held by the state. The AfD is disgusting but until and unless they take up arms, speech is speech. “First they came for the racists, and I didn’t speak up because I was not a racist. Then they came for the publishers of violent video games…”
There is no power that you can give to the state that they will not eventually abuse at their convenience. It positively astounds me that Germans do not understand this, given the nation’s history.
Perhaps interesting here is that some of the things he said were definitely not defensible via "truth is an affirmative defense." But it's ultimately up to the jury, and they can also find him innocent because a reasonable person wouldn't be offended by outlandish accusations.
(Ultimately, though, they can find him innocent for any reason. If they decided he should walk because you can't legally offend cops, that's fine too.)
“walk” refers to criminal prosecution where the alternative is going to prison. This was a civil trial, he was not being prosecuted. The police, despite raiding his house, never charged him with a crime. He was not “found innocent” in a civil suit. He was innocent the whole time even if he lost this trial, it’s just a matter of monetary damage.
Opinion is not defamatory. Satire is not defamatory.
With public officials like police, even false factual statements are not defamatory unless you knew they were false and lied about it specifically to hurt them.
AIUI they sued him in their personal capacities, not as the police department. Any taxpayer funded lawyer to defend the PD from such a thing would presumably not be authorized to work a civil suit for a person who happened to be employed by his client.
This is the framework for requiring government ID to use online services, which increasingly power even local computing (thanks to DRM and cloud services).
They want to abolish anonymous use of internet services, because anonymous publishing at scale is powerful and dangerous to incumbents when they can’t retaliate with malicious prosecution, police harassment, or assassination.
"Framework" means "strategy". This bill is more likely than not a tactic in a much longer insidious campaign to erase anonymity to gain power and profit to normalize taking other rights away a little at a time. We've seen this before with the Clipper chip initiative. I feel sad and bad for anyone on the side of token Karen parents / useful idiots, limousine politicians, lobbyists, billionaires, and people okay with surrendering their and other people's rights. I don't want to live in a society with Flock everywhere, dragnet cell phone tracking, social credit, own nothing, an internet license, de-E2EE, transparent walls dwelling, zero privacy, and absolute proof of birth parents and citizenship every time, long lines, in-person only voting.
It has nothing to do with porn and everything to do with making anonymous use of the internet (and thus anonymous mass publishing) illegal and impossible.
reply