Bob, agent of Hydra

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@luvu2golka earlier today I saw a McLaren get messed up while driving in Los Angeles. If you felt sudden psychic pain about an hour ago, now you know why.

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@chainyoda @babymillionmare @Uniswap @TornadoCash This is the first I've heard of it, and it's fascinating. If you're not legally responsible for your customers, you have no duty to track them, unless the law says otherwise. In Tornado, the Treasury dept. is arguing the law does say otherwise.

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@iamevilhomer412 @BadLegalTakes Some of them have, and they're even more insufferable, if you can believe it.

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@Lormif1 Even if his prediction is off, it's nice to see someone on that side of the debate being honest: He just wants legislative retaliation against publishers who won't promote his favorite content creators. He's been blabbering for decades about freedom, but complains how it's used.

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@derShasta @Merle09544266 @kyledcheney captures all of the supposed types of coercive conduct without regard to what else is captured. I guess my conclusion is, third-party standing is hardly an issue when the plaintiffs fail all three standing requirements anyway?

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@derShasta @Merle09544266 @kyledcheney make a new law" or "looking into antitrust" are so vague there's nothing to enjoin or declare. I think you're right, and I think "what remedy?" is a fundamental problem for the case even if someone did feel coerced. Doughty's insane solution was to draw an injunction that...

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@Donniewalnuts @USConst_Amend_I @AriCohn analysis just works out completely differently online. https://t.co/beprt021SF

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@Donniewalnuts @USConst_Amend_I @AriCohn risk of data breach that doesn't exist in the meatworld version of this. In matters of speech regulation, it is not sufficient that the government is pursuing a compelling interest. Its methods must be narrowly tailored to addressing unlawful speech and likely to succeed. This...

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@derShasta @Merle09544266 @kyledcheney removed after such requests was in violation of each given site's TOS. Combined, those two points badly deflate any argument social media was jawboned into doing the government's bidding.

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@derShasta @Merle09544266 @kyledcheney But overall the rest of your conclusion is still correct. This will always come back to the question of whose decision was it to remove the content. I don't know the figures for other sites, but Twitter refused something like 60% of govt requests? And basically all of what was...

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@tylerhower Libraries and bookstores both enjoy the exact same liability protections for third-party content even though the former typically receives books by donation and the latter typically has some kind of financial arrangement.

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@DoubleJones1 @bradheath Right, the compliance rate was something like 40% iirc? Does not strike me as "such significant encouragement, either overt or covert, that the choice must in law be deemed to be that of the State."

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@Section_230 And they will say, "yes, but they're not liable, so it's not their speech." So it seems that even if words are coming out of your mouth, if the government defines that not to be your speech, no freedom involved. 🫠

[Bob, agent of Hydra @dman4835]

@Section_230 It's really phenomenal to see so many people of such varied politics debating whether editorial decisions in either direction are protected speech. Courts even. But you inevitably run into the fact that enforcement would require telling a company what and what not to publish.