News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by netsharc on Friday October 30, 2020 @10:37AM (#24942654)
I wonder if someone who wants to peddle "Bill Gates installed 5G antennaes to spread Covid" idiocy can get away with it when they add at the top "Mailchimp does not allow disinformation. In light of that, please note that this newsletter is satire and not to be taken seriously.", with the wink being implied but not written...
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by kube-system on Friday October 30, 2020 @10:42AM (#24942710)
You can't really 'hack' a ToS on technicalities. Mailchimp's ToS, like most, are evaluated in their "sole discretion". Businesses in the US can generally choose who they want to do business with for any reason other than membership in a protected class.
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by Nasrudith on Friday October 30, 2020 @11:19AM (#24943156)
Maybe only if it is "actually satirical in tone" as opposed to the "being sincere and pretending it is a joke" style. And maybe because moderation at scale often misses legitimage nuance because it is unthinking by definition.

Suggest using the microchips to make Microsoft muscle in on psychopharmaceutical market and VR if they actually did have the chips and it is jabbing at the logic of the conspiracy theory. Actually taking the absurd premise and using with more logic is clearly taking the piss like showing up to a crystal healing group and suggesting rolling paraplegics down stairs into piles of gemstones or throwing bleeding out soldiers onto them - you will likely be thrown out as a troll.

Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by pjc50 on Friday October 30, 2020 @11:08AM (#24942998)
Ah, the Tucker Carlson / Alex Jones "no reasonable person would take this show seriously" legal defense?
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by amadeuspagel on Friday October 30, 2020 @04:54PM (#24946803)
I'm not aware Tucker Carlson ever made that defense.
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by dimator on Friday October 30, 2020 @11:38PM (#24948957)
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by amadeuspagel on Saturday October 31, 2020 @07:58AM (#24950710)
Interesting. I guess it's the Rachel Maddow / Tucker Carlson / Alex Jones defense, then:

> Media lawyers note this is not the first time this sort of defense has been offered. A $10 million libel lawsuit filed by the owners of One America News Network against MSNBC's top star, Rachel Maddow, was dismissed in May when the judge ruled she had stretched the established facts allowably: "The context of Maddow's statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be opinion."

Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by esja on Friday October 30, 2020 @11:59AM (#24943586)
+ Rachel Maddow
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by amanaplanacanal on Friday October 30, 2020 @01:55PM (#24944991)
Has she used that as a legal defense?
Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by mizzack on Friday October 30, 2020 @02:38PM (#24945466)
> Maddow lawyer Theodore J. “Ted” Boutrous Jr. argued that the liberal host was clearly offering up her “own unique expression” of her views to capture what she saw as the “ridiculous” nature of the undisputed facts.

> “Her comment, therefore, is a quintessential statement ‘of rhetorical hyperbole, incapable of being proved true or false,’” he said.

https://timesofsandiego.com/business/2019/12/02/rachel-maddo...

Judge ruled in her favor:

> “The context of Maddow’s statement shows reasonable viewers would consider the contested statement to be her opinion. A reasonable viewer would not actually think OAN is paid Russian propaganda, instead, he or she would follow the facts of the Daily Beast article; that OAN and Sputnik share a reporter and both pay this reporter to write articles. Anything beyond this is Maddow’s opinion or her exaggeration of the facts,” the judge decided.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/may/23/judge-tosse...

Re:Mailchimp outlines right to ban users for “inaccurate” co... by eternalban on Friday October 30, 2020 @10:57AM (#24942888)
You don't have a firm grasp on censorship and total control over social discourse. Forbidden means precisely that.

Back in my old country, before I foolishly immigrated to the land of "the free" (drum drum), political commentary was first turned into satire and then that was embedded in children's stories, and you had that interesting phenomena of adults passing around children's stories. Good times.

All authoritarian system are fundamentally psychological in nature. Brute force is theraputical. The ultimate objective is acceptance of authoritative narrative. The content matter is entirely irrelevant. Recall in 1984, Winston is being asked "how many fingers?" and "what does 2+2 equal?". Outside of fiction, recall the Church of Rome asserting it's authority by modifying commandments. Rationality, authenticity, applicability, or heaven help us, veracity, are not even variables in the equation of Authoritarian Control Over Information and Social Discourse.