No it really doesn't. There are no legal consequences for insulting someone, unless you actually defame them. Nearly all defamation cases are dismissed by the court immediately for not rising to the very high level of facts required for defamation.
Yes, defamation. Many such cases are dismissed; this one was not and resulted in large punitive damages being awarded.
Less relevant to this case, intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress can also both be against the law in the United States.
The interesting precedent here is if you lie about the dead (who until this fiction, had no protection from defamation), you have defamed any living person who says the opposite and factual information about them.
But we all know the precedent set in this case was a lie. Otherwise anyone who said the kids were really killed would have standing, since Jones thought they were "crisis actors."
We all know this was really used as a back door way to pay the parents for dishonoring the dead. Basically "meh we can't extract justice from the murderer, best we can do is get a lot of money from someone with mutual hate."
Edit: s/precedent/historical precedent/ . I did not mean to imply as assumed below this precedent is legally binding.
Interesting analysis... one potential wrinkle: There is no precedent being set here. This is just the expected outcome within the framework set by past precedent... Nothing novel or new happened wrt the law or anything else. It's just a bog standard case of a trashy asshole riling up his idiotic followers for money, and taking it well beyond the long established line of acceptable.
Most people who have this opinion going in tend to change it when the learn the particulars of the case. Jones absolutely knew he was lying, he did it deliberately, the lies caused incredible real world harm, he knew they were causing harm and he kept doing it because that’s his business model and that’s how he gets rich.
It’s sad that people think this way. As a young child growing up in the 90s in a rural part of a small country, being able to access the “speech” of people around the world via internet forums was a revelation.
Are you really so scared of China that you’d throw that all away?
I think there is an aspect of foreign interference that Americans might be particularly blind to.
Namely, we are engaging in foreign interference towards any country that uses our social media (Mysterious Twitter X, Facebook, Youtube, et al.). Japan's online discourse lives and breathes Mysterious Twitter X, for example. We definitely influence and interfere in their domestic affairs whether anyone likes it or not.
If the sanctity(?) of domestic-only electoral will is paramount, it stands to reason that any and all social media should be legally barred from crossing borders regardless if that even makes internet sense.
If foreign interference in domestic politics is a concern, you absolutely do not want foreign-owned communication channels operating within you. They have every reason to manipulate discourse within them towards specific foreign ends in defiance to domestic interests.
TikTok manipulates discourse everywhere towards Chinese ends, X/Facebook/et al. manipulate discourse everywhere towards American ends.
This is an entirely separate concern from firewalls, which with the way you posited it might as well be a strawman.
What about the algorithm changing over time to favor longer posts and content creators on the platform adapting to the change? I suspect you’d see the same pattern with the average length of popular non-music YouTube videos over time.
Good point, that's a good explanation. I think the timing with ChatGPT and how consistent it was for 5+ years before that make for very strong circumstantial evidence, but you're right that there is at least one other good possibility.
> I don’t want to download a random executable from some unknown source
Why would you do that?
---
There's few applications that warrant having direct access to the GPU and other devices. And for those, a native app would be a much efficient way (for the user).
yeah but users don't care about technical efficiency, they care about having seamless experiences that aren't interrupted by long downloads, app/context switching, and loading screens.
But what’s stopping you just using the web page (in a browser that it works with)? Yes, they want you to use the app, but you can still do what you want.
There is usually critical missing functionality from the web version (mostly around native filesystem access). Also, most sites that offer an Electron app paster annoying banners advertising this fact across their web version...
I’m curious, what’s the rationale for this? Is it corporate espionage? Or do you live in China/have family there and engage in online activity that might cause problems?
> People should avoid giving more data to China out of sheer principle
Or self preservation.
Every intelligence agency collects blackmail. The obvious targets are those in high office. But sometimes you need disposable randos to e.g. collect intelligence or place assets. Being able to pass blackmail to an operative who can use it to convince e.g. a farmer to give them pictures of a silo or Air Force base (under the guise of commercial espionage for a domestic competitor or whatever) is valuable.
Agreed, and I know Opera is Chinese-owned, but Opera's web site still lists their headquarters as Norway. Doesn't this still make them a Norwegian company, with some safeguards against abuse? Not sure if any EU laws might also come into play.
I think foreign intelligence services are perfectly comfortable "navigating" laws. Obviously every company is vulnerable to this, but it sure is preferable not to have ownership concentrated in a country where all corporations are de facto extensions of the state itself.
You don't have to live in China for Chinese surveillance to be undesirable or even harmful. The Chinese government has made great strides, but they are still a corrupt governing body completely outside our control. I already don't want the US government to spy on me, and I actually have ways of being compensated for damages they do, let alone a government with diametrically opposed ideology and active campaigns to harm Western interests.
