Technology

31 readers

1 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!

founded 2 years ago

Judge rules White House pressured social networks to “suppress free speech” (arstechnica.com)

submitted 1 year ago by asteroidrainfall@kbin.social to c/tech@kbin.social

172 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A federal judge yesterday ordered the Biden administration to halt a wide range of communications with social media companies, siding with Missouri and Louisiana in a lawsuit that alleges Biden and his administration violated the First Amendment by colluding with social networks "to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] C4RP3_N0CT3M@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There was no evidence to rule out it either, but they did it anyway.

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My dude, what are you doing here?

There is no evidence to support your stance that this dude was sidelined because of his views. All you have is his claim that they sidelined him for his views.

This appears to be another conspiracy theory.

Focus, man.

[–] C4RP3_N0CT3M@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He said it himself. There was a whole panel about it which you can watch for yourself where evidence was presented. Are you suggesting he was lying?

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Someone has to be, since we have conflicting claims.

[–] C4RP3_N0CT3M@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Please repeat your claim, just so we're clear.

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I am not making a claim. How are you so confused?

[–] C4RP3_N0CT3M@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

If you're making no claim, then how are we disagreeing?

Edit: This suggests some sort of claim you are making:
"Someone has to be, since we have conflicting claims."

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Please for the sake of my sanity go read the link you provided. It will clear up your befuddlement.