A bakery exists here in the physical world, and denying service based on religion or sexuality has real, physical consequences.
Facebook is an intangible... multi-player notepad. Getting a post taken down on Facebook has exactly nothing to do with life here in realityland.
Facebook is a private company. Facebook can "censor" whatever they want. There is no free speech issue.
Of course there is a free speech issue. Speech is being censored.
No, it isn't. You have no "right" to post on Facebook. You speech isn't being censored, you're free to post it elsewhere... you're not going to jail for it. You don't get to tell the Zuck what is and isn't allowed on his platform. I don't like it... it appears you don't like it, but that's our opinion on the matter. Our opinions don't get to override other's actual rights.
RTFA and the open letter? No, there's no claim of illegality... but plenty of "waaah, you're restricting my rights".
You, I, nor anyone else have any rights on Facebook. While I _personally_ disagree with removing the photo... this really is a non-issue.
I will agree, restrictions are restrictions... and I find them icky. However, my point was that there's nothing illegal about it. There's no free speech guarantee where Facebook (or any other business) is concerned. You don't own the content, you don't own the platform, you ARE the product. If you don't like Facebook's rules, then go play somewhere else.
How is that relevant? The first amendment is only applicable when the government tries to censor, businesses (public or private) can censor whatever they want on their own property.
Facebook is a private company. Facebook can "censor" whatever they want.
There is no free speech issue.
There is no first amendment rights issue.
There is no journalistic duty to do anything...
Facebook isn't a news source, it's social media.
As much as I think it's stupid that the post was removed, because this clearly isn't child porn, watching people scream "Waaaaah, facebook deleted my post" turns my stomach. Grow the fuck up.
They were trying to get info from the guy who tried to blow up the ship. Right after this, Gibbs told Dinozzo to put the guy on suicide watch and make sure he got to DC in one piece.
The cops are allowed to lie to you, you know.
How can you be forced to "take down" a pointer? Not only is tpb not hosting anything but pointers... but the proxy is just a pointer to a pointer... *boggle*
Zimbra is indeed pretty cool looking from the user interface side, however... last time I tried it, it wanted to run its own embedded mysql/apache/etc.
This blows, because then I can't use my distro's package manager to keep up on updates.
Unless of course, the site is publishing an application using "one-click deployment".
In that case, the code executes on the client, and the client would need the framework.
(I know, doesn't really apply here... just a technicality)
Slashdot Mirror
I know it's supposed to be self-healing... but I'm not sure even the great internet can survive stupid of this magnitude.
A bakery exists here in the physical world, and denying service based on religion or sexuality has real, physical consequences. Facebook is an intangible... multi-player notepad. Getting a post taken down on Facebook has exactly nothing to do with life here in realityland.
Facebook is a private company. Facebook can "censor" whatever they want. There is no free speech issue.
Of course there is a free speech issue. Speech is being censored.
No, it isn't. You have no "right" to post on Facebook. You speech isn't being censored, you're free to post it elsewhere... you're not going to jail for it. You don't get to tell the Zuck what is and isn't allowed on his platform. I don't like it... it appears you don't like it, but that's our opinion on the matter. Our opinions don't get to override other's actual rights.
RTFA and the open letter? No, there's no claim of illegality... but plenty of "waaah, you're restricting my rights". You, I, nor anyone else have any rights on Facebook. While I _personally_ disagree with removing the photo... this really is a non-issue.
I will agree, restrictions are restrictions... and I find them icky. However, my point was that there's nothing illegal about it. There's no free speech guarantee where Facebook (or any other business) is concerned. You don't own the content, you don't own the platform, you ARE the product. If you don't like Facebook's rules, then go play somewhere else.
How is that relevant? The first amendment is only applicable when the government tries to censor, businesses (public or private) can censor whatever they want on their own property.
Facebook is a private company. Facebook can "censor" whatever they want. There is no free speech issue. There is no first amendment rights issue. There is no journalistic duty to do anything... Facebook isn't a news source, it's social media. As much as I think it's stupid that the post was removed, because this clearly isn't child porn, watching people scream "Waaaaah, facebook deleted my post" turns my stomach. Grow the fuck up.
They were trying to get info from the guy who tried to blow up the ship. Right after this, Gibbs told Dinozzo to put the guy on suicide watch and make sure he got to DC in one piece. The cops are allowed to lie to you, you know.
How can you be forced to "take down" a pointer? Not only is tpb not hosting anything but pointers... but the proxy is just a pointer to a pointer... *boggle*
This blows, because then I can't use my distro's package manager to keep up on updates.
Also, iirc it requires a pretty hefty machine.
You obviously have never eaten SPAM, otherwise you'd never have classified it as "food".
You got lucky. We got 700Mhz equipment and ultra-super-fast 8k connection.
I could be wrong... it's happened before.
Turn in your geek card... now.
Even better when you remember the line breaks.
sudo apt-get update followed by sudo apt-get dist-upgrade Would probably work better.
ga$oline
I think I'm going to start using that one.
Unless of course, the site is publishing an application using "one-click deployment". In that case, the code executes on the client, and the client would need the framework. (I know, doesn't really apply here... just a technicality)