who is saying that? who is saying that if you have an account on a defederated instance that you can’t also have an account on their instance?
who is saying that? who is saying that if you have an account on a defederated instance that you can’t also have an account on their instance?
he’s right there. he has the pamphlets. he’s giving them away for free. it’s 100% available to anyone who wants it. no one is stopping you from doing anything, they’re just not helping.
If defederation is censorship then refusing to take a pamphlet from someone handing them out on the street is censorship
https://github.com/j0be/PowerDeleteSuite
All you have to do is follow a link from this page, then drag a bookmark to your bookmarks bar, then go to your reddit user page and click the bookmark. You can even tell it what to replace your stuff with if you want to.
and I’m testing Youtube Revanced on my phone for unlimited ad-free background play for nothing!
not just a punishment, but a pretty severe one
It’s also clear interference in this person’s ability to organize a defense, which is yet another way it could be unconstitutional.
not a mistrial, this isn’t happening during trial. It might be interesting if they do arrest him for violating the pre-trial terms to see what sort of civil liability the courts may have if it turns out they were wrong, but even then these are often drawn up as ‘consent decrees’ which are essentially contracts you enter into with the court where a lot of things are possible that wouldn’t be normally.
we’re gonna monitor all of your family’s devices, including people who are not charged with or suspected of a crime. if any of them do anything we don’t like, we’ll assume it’s you and charge you
we acknowledge that requests to forbidden sites can be made without the user’s knowledge or consent, but we’re still going to throw you in jail over it
Imagine you’re legally banned from driving a car. Let’s even make the hypothetical situation a little bit more cut and dry than the real one from the article and assume you’ve actually been convicted of something and aren’t just charged. This is the equivalent of saying “we’re going to put monitoring devices in every car in your driveway, if any of them start up we’ll get an alert. If we get an alert, we’ll assume you’re driving and come arrest you for violating the ban. We also get an alert if the alarm goes off and even if it’s because an acorn fell on your car we’re going to come and arrest you.”
This is truly an amazing violation of the rights of several people. Welcome to the panopticon, you’re never sure you’re not being surveilled so you have to always act like someone could be watching.
Just deleted the reddit app. Looks like that’s gonna turn out to be a great decision as they continually make it worse.
ohai, it me! Mostly what I’m doing with the deck is going back through my old library. My silly self even bought new vegas about a week before epic started to give it away (still worth it, best fallout game which puts it well up in the running for best RPG).
But the game I’m really excited about on the deck, the one I can’t put down, is an indie hockey roguelike called tape to tape. I grew up on games like NHL 94 for the sega genesis, and this one plays like those old games, but it also has a generational roguelike element to it. You play a series of short hockey games against different teams, each with their own special talents. When you win, you win in-game currency with which you can upgrade your center, unlock different wingers to play with, unlock different talents that you can give to your players or even whole team talents. It’s in early access on steam right now, plays perfectly on the deck right out of the box, has an active community where players and devs interact on discord and it’s just really, really fun. Strong recommend if you played arcade-y hockey games as a kid.
the misunderstanding is in that I don’t understand where defederating is in any way censorship, but everyone is treating it as though it’s censorship. Defederating is just refusing to help spread someone’s speech, which is perfectly fine and reasonable. The message I refuse to signal boost is still there, people can see it, they can even choose to boost it further if they want. The people who originate the message are not locked out of the instance that defederate them either. But everyone acts like this is the equivalent of putting a gun to someone’s head and demanding that they shut up and I’m honestly really confused about it.