Louis Ingenthron @LouisIngenthron@social.cleverlibre.org

Black Mirror S6 E3 "Beyond the Sea" appears to have gotten relatively positive reviews online, but my friend and I hated it. Every single plot point was a predictable cliché and the plot itself was full of egregious logic holes.
Black Mirror episodes should surprise us or make us see a new perspective, but this story has been done a thousand times in fantasy and sci fi history, and quite a bit more competently too.
This episode was a real letdown.

@otownKim @TonyStark @cynblogger Came here to say the same thing. In Orlando, we have pride flags in most windows and refer to Rick Scott as "skeletor".

All are welcome here (even skeletor).

@Clementulus It sounds like you feel a degree of ownership over the social spaces provided by the social media servers.... but that's an illusion.

You're in somebody else's house, and they can ask you to leave if you offend them, whether or not they think that's good for the rest of the guests at their house.
Sure, sometimes moderation decisions are made with the community in mind, but it's much easier to think of it as "Ew, I don't want to pay to host this crap on my server." With that context, the right to do so seems perfectly fair.

As users, if we don't agree with the decisions of the server's owners/administrators, we're free to find greener pastures from someone who more closely aligns with our values.

@Unit @unchartedworlds @futurebird It's okay because you agreed to it when you joined Twitter. These are private spaces that exist by invite only, and those invites can be rescinded.

And that rule applies to every private space, even your residence. You can see why it would be especially useful in, for example, a women's shelter or an alcoholics anonymous meeting.

Also, "telling others why [the user] is wrong" just *elevates* their speech, while deplatforming them makes their message less accessible. When you think about trolls and spammers, the benefits of that route become obvious; few bad actors argue in good faith.

A group choosing to disassociate with certain individuals is one of the ways a group defines itself, and is itself a form of speech.

@ericholthaus Isn't the NWS essentially "member-owned" already? Are you using that taxpayer-funded data *and* collecting a membership fee?

@mentallyalex If my spam folder is to be believed, I am possibly the most unfortunately endowed person on the planet.

Honestly, anyone working in the crypto space who *isn't* scamming rubes for millions of dollars must just be incompetent at this point.

I'm usually the first to rail against the "think of the children" nonsense... but if I had kids, I probably wouldn't let them mow lawns for cash in Florida anymore. Not when lunatics who fire an entire AR mag blindly out their window are considered by the law to be using appropriate force.

https://www.tampabay.com/news/crime/2023/06/26/dunedin-man-fired-30-ar-15-rounds-pool-cleaner-he-thought-was-intruder-sheriff-says/

@mloxton I disagree with this. If you go into a debate with the right mindset, it's one of the greatest ways to learn new facts and perspectives. For example, most of my knowledge of 1A jurisprudence comes from being proven wrong in Twitter debates and learning something new.

While not everyone approaches debates with such scholarly ambitions, I think writing them off as "childish" is going too far in the other direction.

How can we truly define our own ideology without it being regularly challenged by our peers?