> they definitely have the capability to do it. You'd think so, but I guess they don't.
I mean, it's not like I trashed it or compared it to Mozart—I even made sure to include "interesting, stimulating, or tonally remarkable" in an attempt to preempt that latter pushback. But even if I did, why can't I?…
I'm not, I promise
[flagged]
> I am not familiar with what you’re claiming here about the matter being judged collectively in due time with Brazilian due process - care to share a source? Top article on G1:…
Because doctors never misdiagnose or prescribe wrong medications... I'd rather make my own choices, thank you very much.
Looks like this uses DOT? Click on "Editor" at the top
I never said they were, but the judge isn't wrong for deciding on legality rather than morality.
What's happening in Pakistan has no bearing on what's happening in Brazil. Just because "twitter is banned" in both countries doesn't mean it was banned for the same reasons or that the ban applies in the same way.
Please don't buy into the lazy narrative that this is a "maverick judge". That's an incorrect take that is fueled by political propaganda.
Irrelevant. Disagreeing on moral terms is not the same as deciding it has not followed the law and must face repercussions, which is what was decided here.
You can "be from Brazil" and still not understand the matter. Legal decisions are not a matter of "I agree" or "I disagree". They are a matter of law and facts. How exactly was the judge's decision here not in…
Not for legal purposes, it isn't. Unless you're arguing the morality of the Brazilian Constitution and the limits it imposes on freedom of speech in some scenarios, such as outlawing racism. The judge doesn't care about…
Factually incorrect. Plenty of free and open information in other networks in Brazil and through its free press.
Manager mode assumes that workers clock in and do what they can to drive the company forward. But there is no altruism among workers. Their decisions are for themselves first and for the company second.
It takes effort, requires goodwill, has damaging implications to internal politics and ultimately is not the best way to maximize tenure at C-level roles. Executives are solving for their job, not for the company's…
Are senators or pastors above the law? Go read the decision: https://www.conjur.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/PET-124... More generally, one doesn't get to say "No, judge, I won't comply with your decision" without…
It boiled down to X not taking down accounts associated with individuals with outstanding warrants who were inciting violence. Brazilian law requires X to do so.
> they definitely have the capability to do it. You'd think so, but I guess they don't.
I mean, it's not like I trashed it or compared it to Mozart—I even made sure to include "interesting, stimulating, or tonally remarkable" in an attempt to preempt that latter pushback. But even if I did, why can't I?…
I'm not, I promise
[flagged]
[flagged]
> I am not familiar with what you’re claiming here about the matter being judged collectively in due time with Brazilian due process - care to share a source? Top article on G1:…
[flagged]
Because doctors never misdiagnose or prescribe wrong medications... I'd rather make my own choices, thank you very much.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Looks like this uses DOT? Click on "Editor" at the top
[flagged]
I never said they were, but the judge isn't wrong for deciding on legality rather than morality.
[flagged]
What's happening in Pakistan has no bearing on what's happening in Brazil. Just because "twitter is banned" in both countries doesn't mean it was banned for the same reasons or that the ban applies in the same way.
Please don't buy into the lazy narrative that this is a "maverick judge". That's an incorrect take that is fueled by political propaganda.
Irrelevant. Disagreeing on moral terms is not the same as deciding it has not followed the law and must face repercussions, which is what was decided here.
You can "be from Brazil" and still not understand the matter. Legal decisions are not a matter of "I agree" or "I disagree". They are a matter of law and facts. How exactly was the judge's decision here not in…
[flagged]
Not for legal purposes, it isn't. Unless you're arguing the morality of the Brazilian Constitution and the limits it imposes on freedom of speech in some scenarios, such as outlawing racism. The judge doesn't care about…
Factually incorrect. Plenty of free and open information in other networks in Brazil and through its free press.
Manager mode assumes that workers clock in and do what they can to drive the company forward. But there is no altruism among workers. Their decisions are for themselves first and for the company second.
It takes effort, requires goodwill, has damaging implications to internal politics and ultimately is not the best way to maximize tenure at C-level roles. Executives are solving for their job, not for the company's…
Are senators or pastors above the law? Go read the decision: https://www.conjur.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/PET-124... More generally, one doesn't get to say "No, judge, I won't comply with your decision" without…
It boiled down to X not taking down accounts associated with individuals with outstanding warrants who were inciting violence. Brazilian law requires X to do so.