Posts by Doctor Syntax

Re: Maybe a site of links needs a far simpler setup?

According to a report in anther place one of his current ventures turned them down citing human rights.

Re: Hurrah for screen readers!

As "tit" is a term for idiot in RightPondLand it would still make sense.

Re: I'm not a twitter user

"The problem is that problematic users feel able to speak without fear of consequences."

Perhaps this detachment from reality is what lead them to the physical action - no fear of consequences. In the real world, of course, there are consequences.

Re: I'm not a twitter user

We know nothing about their take on social conversations. All we know about is their reaction to conversations which were anti-social to the point of incitement to violence. At that point the criminal law becomes a consideration.

Re: Promote healthy conversation?

The woke cancel culture is pretty well the same thing, inciting a crowd to howl down a street-corner speaker they don't like, even if the speaker has simply failed to catch up with the latest twists of snowflake vocabulary.

Let's put the blame on the common thread: group-think.

Re: Screwed the pooch and knows it

"Social media have shot themselves in the foot by colluding to ban Trump, en mass the way they have."

A set of closely linked events, some illegal, raised public revulsion. Associated businesses made decisions on some any or all of various considerations arising from it: PR, risk of criminal liability and moral grounds. AFAICS it's reasonable to expect each to make similar decisions independently when presented with the same situation. If you think collusion is involved where none is needed you should provide evidence; without that you're in conspiracy theory territory.

Re: Good idea

"You are a startup, you need an expert "

Wrong order. Should be:

1. Be an expert

2. Set up your startup based on what you know

Re: Liberty speech

"There is something dreadfully wrong when Twitter and Facebook become the final arbiter."

There's something dreadfully wrong if they have to become the final arbiters.

Re: So this is what we're going to have for the next 4 years

Back in 1968 there were student demonstrations about one thing or another all over the western world. I don't suppose many of those in Peoples Democracy in Belfast had terrorism in mind but it provided the starting point for years of that and a mob carrying arms and invading the legislature building are considerably further down that line PD ever were.

Re: Picking sides

"Trump never got around to articulating what he thought the true numbers were."

Just what he wanted them to be. And his definition of theft is the difference between his wants and reality.

Re: Picking sides

"These moves by the tech companies are not going to hurt Trump at all. But they are a kick in the nads to the millions of people who supported and voted for him. Those are the potential customers at risk."

How many of Trump supporters are decision makers in real and potential Salesforce customers (a) in the US and (b) in the rest of the world?

Re: Picking sides

"Do the players of big tech really think they have become so indispensable that their customers will silently stand by and do nothing?"

But which customers are you thinking about. Out beyond the US shores lies the majority of our planet and right now many of Salesforce's customers there are looking at Trump's party and forming their own opinions about it. Salesforce is concerned about what these customers might do.

Salesforce, like any multi-national, sells to a wider clientele than the US (yes, USians, you are just a part of this world). If they judge that Trump has tainted the reputation of his party as far as the rest of the world is concerned then disassociating themselves with is is the better overall step.

This is the same use of "consider" as in "consider your position" which translates as "it's time for you to resign".

Re: Thank god

"60+ judges (many of them Republicans too, some even appointed by Trump)"

Good for the judges but you can't imagine how bad that statement sounds to someone outside the US. The problem is that the political orientation of the judge, together with the fact that they're politically appointed*, is just taken as normal and acceptable.

* The problem with that is with the political nature, not the actual politician.

Re: @Mike the FlyingRat

Add one to the list of possibles: being held an accessory to any conspiracies being hatched on there.

Re: Thank god

The notion that they could start up from bare metal in a few hours suggests that they've never even tried this as a DR exercise to find out if they can do it for real. Your first DR exercise is.....enlightening.

Re: Stupidity vs Science?

"a good idea work ... her theory was weak"

That doesn't sound like a good idea. Wishful thinking, maybe; good idea, no.

Re: Sure thing

"The defendants can always claim that they weren't intending to be deliberately obstructive, they were just incompetent."

No guarantee of being believed.

Re: Sure thing

It's called being in a hole and digging.

Re: @Doctor Syntax

"Whatever is done it must be better that the path to challenging these sort of edicts is shorter when the EU and the ECJ are no longer concerned."

You're probably right. Without supra-national jurisdiction the challenge would be thrown out PDQ.

We have a govt. that's chafed at having to obey international law. They've got rid of as much of that as they can. They've also chafed at UK law and judicial review and have shown indications of wanting to get rid of that.

Did you vote to "take back control?" What you weren't told is that you weren't taking back control. It was the govt and it's you they propose to control.