Posts by Common De-mominator

1. 2019-04-11 at 3:10 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by -SpectraL For the content itself, that comes down to civil litigation, not criminal litigation.

   
   Since legality is obviously irrelevant, so is this response. Try again.
2. 2019-04-11 at 2:56 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by -SpectraL Not when the law enforcers are corrupted themselves. In that case, all laws don't matter.

   
   Then what the fuck is the point of arguing legality in the first palace?
   
   
   
   
   
   

   An electronic communication is called an "instrument". When you steal an instrument, you are responsible for stealing the instrument, not for what's contained in it.

   
   Would you hold someone responsible for selling a non stolen ebook with stolen text in it? What removes its value as opposed to the physical book?
3. 2019-04-11 at 2:24 PM UTC in what's the last thing you bought?
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut
   Damn that could be some useful shot. I just cook my eggs manually like a pleb. I do share Alton Brown's dislike for kitchen unitaskers though. But I do eat a lot of eggs so maybe this one is worth it.
4. 2019-04-11 at 2:20 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by -SpectraL Then you would be charged for theft of the book, not for what's written in it.

   
   What gives the physical book its value as opposed to, say, selling an illegitimate ebook copy of the same book?
5. 2019-04-11 at 2:18 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by -SpectraL Well, when you're dealing with law breakers who do not respect the law, then anything goes. Of course.

   
   Well no, there are laws on how to deal with lawbreakers. Either way, legality is pretty much irrelevant to what is right and wrong.
6. 2019-04-11 at 2:17 PM UTC in what's the last thing you bought?
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson a 6 egg cooker from Aldi for $12.99 (along with eggs and other groceries)

   
   Does it boil the eggs or poach them or what?
7. 2019-04-11 at 2:14 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by -SpectraL Goods and speech are two different things entirely; they can't be lumped into the same category in a legal sense. Goods are physical property. Whereas, speech is not a physical form, rather, it is a God-given right.

   
   What if the goods are, say, a book?
8. 2019-04-11 at 2:13 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut

   Originally posted by -SpectraL "wrong"
   
   Section 230 lives inside the Communications Decency Act of 1996, and it gives websites broad legal immunity: With some exceptions, online platforms can't be sued for something posted by a user — and that remains true even if they act a little like publishers, by moderating posts or setting specific standards.
   
   "Section 230 is as important as the First Amendment to protecting free speech online, certainly here in the U.S.," says Emma Llanso, a free expression advocate at the Center for Democracy and Technology.
   
   No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider (47 U.S. Code § 230) The argument goes that without Section 230, we would never have platforms like YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Yelp or Reddit — sites that allow ordinary people to post opinions or write reviews.
   
   It's "the one line of federal code that has created more economic value in this country than any other," says Michael Beckerman, who runs the Internet Association, which represents many of Silicon Valley's largest companies.
   
   But Section 230 is also tied to some of the worst stuff on the Internet, protecting sites when they host revenge porn, extremely gruesome videos or violent death threats. The broad leeway given to Internet companies represents "power without responsibility," Georgetown University law professor Rebecca Tushnet wrote in an oft-cited paper.
   
   Cox says, "The original purpose of this law was to help clean up the Internet, not to facilitate people doing bad things on the Internet."
   
   https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2018/03/21/591622450/section-230-a-key-legal-shield-for-facebook-google-is-about-to-change

   
   None of this contradicts the fact that if they receive a takedown notice and don't do it, they will be held responsible.
9. 2019-04-11 at 1:19 PM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Malice Metro Edition
   

   Common De-mominator African Astronaut
   Also, any ass shots to judge?
10. 2019-04-11 at 1:17 PM UTC in The Retarded Thread: Malice Metro Edition
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut

    Originally posted by Octavian Thinking about getting one of these what do you think?
    
    

    
    That would look way cooler if it went over your shoulder like a caveman rather than to one side of your hip, where it looks turbo faggy.
11. 2019-04-11 at 1:16 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut

    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny as a matter of fact, it is.

    
    It is not. Platforms like Twitter and Facebook are already liable for hosting illegal content if they don't take it down for example.
12. 2019-04-11 at 1:15 PM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut

    Originally posted by -SpectraL Keep in mind that it's not a crime to publish classified material, only to hack it. That means these criminals are breaking the law on behalf of their respective criminal deep states, trying hide and coverup their own crimes, and they've now fully demonstrated that they have no respect for law or decency. All publishers are now in danger from these lawless tyrants.

    
    Would it be okay for someone to sell stolen goods, regardless of legality?
13. 2019-04-11 at 11:19 AM UTC in Autism
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut
    Autavian
14. 2019-04-11 at 11:13 AM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut

    Originally posted by vindicktive vinny twitter was responsible for doxxing zimmerman ?
    
    like how they say facebook was responsible for what tarrant did ?
    
    these are whats wrong with unternet. you dont take a pile of shit and use it as a gold standard.

    
    Yeah Wikileaks is a social media platform for sure, lul
15. 2019-04-11 at 2:31 AM UTC in ASSANGE TO GET FUCKED LIVESTREAM
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut

    Originally posted by Lanny People are going to die regardless.

    
    Would you accept this justification from a murderer?
16. 2019-04-11 at 2:22 AM UTC in are the jedis following me
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut
    They don't need to follow you, they have your phone.
17. 2019-04-11 at 12:07 AM UTC in Autism
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut
    More like aNigortiti
18. 2019-04-11 at 12:05 AM UTC in So I got a new neko
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut
    Damn you're a massive faggot.
19. 2019-04-10 at 11:59 PM UTC in Jail in about 48 hours
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut
    ARTICLE THIRTEEN'D
    
    AMERICA BABYYYY
20. 2019-04-10 at 11:19 PM UTC in Jail in about 48 hours
    

    Common De-mominator African Astronaut

    Originally posted by -SpectraL You have to fight bodily functions with bodily functions.

    
    Cum and shit swirl soft serve crammed back into your anus