HN user
Latin script is only slightly worse than Hangul (which eliminates syllabic ambiguity), but English is a horror. In sane languages using Latin script, new letters are invented or diacritics are used to represent sounds not used in Latin.
smartphones are impossible to use if you’re restricted to Chinese characters
This isn't actually true. Handwriting recognition is much more popular than any other means of text input in Hong Kong.
Your analogy is absurd. Social networks are nothing like telecom at all.
It's more like GoDaddy or NameCheap refusing to host stormfront.
All the tweets are deleted now so obviously I can't post any of them. Twitter does have access to Milo's DM history, however, and you can be banned for inciting harassment through direct message.
Use a credible source, not one that isn't above photoshopping tweets.
Why should Twitter be coerced into publishing racist tripe?
[Citation Needed]
The first amendment does not guarantee a right to a platform.
The rule against harassment.
https://support.twitter.com/articles/18311
actively posting racist tweets.
[Citation Needed]
Milo was banned for repeated rule violations and getting a troll army to harass Leslie Jones. Stop trying to revise history.
Come on. The main idea of that book is that not massacring all the arriving brown people is a mistake.
Of course, seeing as your username has an 88 in it, I really doubt your comment was sincere.
Passages from the book: http://emptylighthouse.com/camp-saints-most-hideous-passages...
Analysis: http://theweek.com/articles/611274/dystopian-antiimmigration...
True, the current President has made a significant amount of money from scams like Trump University.
I'm saying that the sentiment expressed (vacuous complaints about "wrongthink" when the "wrongthink" in question is complaints about people choosing not to associate with fascists) originates from Stormfront and their ideological brothers-in-arms. Whether he's an actual white supremacist or someone who got suckered into repeating their propaganda is immaterial.
Bannon has, though. He thinks the correct solutions are the ones presented in Camp of the Saints.
Bush didn't employ actual fascists like vitez Gorka of the Vitezi Rend, a Horthyite organization that helped the Nazis kill Jews, in his administration.
Sometimes the outcomes are better when appointed technocrats to decide things, particularly when the people are manifestly incapable of making good decisions.
Of course, there is something to be said for allowing people to screw up their own government irreparably and be forced to suffer the consequences.
Your idea of "compromise" is to demand capitulation. There is no reason for anyone to comply with your demands because you bring nothing to the table.
In the end, it was conservatives who shot Milo down by exposing his advocacy of Catholic priest molestation. His remaining supporters are fascist and reactionary pedophiles.
People from geographic Red America are welcome as long as they aren't bigots, fascists, or pedophiles.
How you come to these conclusions based on that one statement
Because that one statement is from Stormfront.
You are embarrassing yourself. The concept of natural monopolies and why they are bad was settled economics in the 19th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_monopoly
Also, I was talking about the oil industry 110 years ago, not the modern energy industry. A similar modern industry to ISPs is telecom, and the only reason that those companies haven't all merged together is because of antitrust law (which you would also want repealed if you were consistent at all).
Yours is the kind of negative, noncontributory comment I wouldn't be surprised to see dang flag.
Your comment consists entirely of conspiracy theories and personal attacks.
In the previous election we had a milquetoast liberal running against a ur-fascist demagogue. It is clear which one was the lesser of two evils, and now we are seeing the effects of America's choice in this bill and others.
If Hillary Clinton was president or if the Democrats had control of one chamber of Congress, this bill never would have passed.
It's called Duverger's Law.
Your average internet user doesn't even know what a VPN is, let alone the significance of this law.
If you knew the first thing about economics, you would know that the natural, regulation-free state of ISPs is for them to merge together into a single company the way that oil companies merged together to form Standard Oil at the turn of the 20th century. In that scenario, what you would get is the choice of one product, and you would pay an unreasonable amount of money for it.
Of course, since you don't know the first thing about economics, what we're treated to instead is some false ideological platitudes about the free market.
I wonder where masonic is now.
I'd just like to register my opinion that I don't see Washington Post is an objective, nor even a trustworthy source at this point.
That's because you probably believe that the Illuminati or clockwork elves are real.
Of course, the math says that with the current voting system, any third party that emerges as a major force will always consume one of the existing major parties, leading the nation back to a two party system. I wonder why people always ignore this inconvenient theorem.
No, what matters is tradeoffs. Is one party's set of policies far more problematic than those of the other party?
The bill allows ISPs to sell their customers' data, among other things. The article says enough about what the bill does.
Your complaints about "people pontificating along party lines" do nothing but reveal your own biases when the vote is so starkly along party lines. In a case like this, the objective analysis is clearly that the Republicans are wrong and the Democrats are right.