That's a false dilemma. There's a middle ground between allowing only approved speech and allowing any speech whatsoever. And we already make that distinction. Fascists don't believe in free speech and threaten the rights of others through threats of violence, which isn't protected speech. Likewise fraud, libel, slander, blackmail, false advertising, and CSAM aren't protected and are considered harmful.
Referencing people whose communication styles are notoriously difficult to understand for average people is not great support for your point.
Anticolonialist is a weird username for someone simping for Russian colonialism in sovereign territory.
The idea that random people pick a select few musicians to be inducted is just more artificial scarcity bullshit. It's not a legitimate institution if it can't recognize more people to give a wider breadth of exposure to the legacy of rock n roll. By inducted some, they pretend they have the authority to determine the legacy of rock n roll, but their snubs say more about their deficiencies than about those they snub.
So, his glowing red weak spot is emotional trauma. Time to ask around in the castle where he grew up about stories from his childhood.
Also you can't just make your own micronation wherever you want. It has to already exist.
This kind of makes the concept of a micronation useless. The point is that anyone can make their own nation with their own rules wherever they are or go. If you have to pick someone else's, then it's no different than picking someone else's recognized nation.
The law’s section that bans books depicting sex acts from school libraries includes an exception for religious texts, like the Christian Bible.
What a coincidence! My deeply held religious beliefs in a new religion I just made up holds all LGBTQ+ books as sacred religious texts...
I sincerely appreciate that WSJ thinks their propaganda is so important that I'd want to pay to read it.
Never try to do anything good because bad might inadvertently result from the action.
even their title is creepy, Human Resources
The only appropriate use of the term is when your cat is talking about you to other cats...
HenchmanNumber3
joined 1 year ago
This isn't a smoking gun.
You can't trust that ChatGPT is telling the truth, but also the use of copyrighted material is acceptable under a fair use standard written into US copyright law. Whether it is fair use or not is up to a court to decide, but "without permission" doesn't automatically mean "illegally."