@kroyio @georgetakei That's just blatantly wrong.

SCOTUS set the standard for incitement in Brandenburg v Ohio, which established a 4-prong test: To be considered incitement, the speech has to be (1) intended to, and (2) understood by a reasonable person to, direct others to commit (3) imminent (4) lawless action.

So, no, "any speech intended to prompt violence" is not the standard, and I'd appreciate it if you stopped spreading that false information.

Moreover, "stochastic terrorism" doesn't describe speech that's intended to prompt violence. Stochastic terrorism is about fanning the flames of hatred so that those with their own violent impulses act on them. It literally does not meet a single one of the four prongs of the Brandenburg test.