It terms of a hostile 3rd party and not an automated system? 5 times.
Snoopy relatives of women I have dated a couple times, a couple times by PIs paid to track me down, and a stalker once.
So...yeah. It's a real problem and none of these people had a legitimate cause to do so. Even beyond FB, etc. I don't post my face online because of shit like that.
Other people have stopped posting pics of me as well, a couple people have been called based on my name being tagged to things on social media.
I went in and untagged myself from a bunch of stuff my parents posted after my online friend commented on one of the pictures. It wasn't that it was super problematic, it's just I realized I really didn't want family pictures broadcast to my friends.
Honestly, I am more worried about the fact HN seems oblivious to the fact Twitter was being used as a targeted propaganda system by a foreign government than I am of censorship in the US.
A foreign government? Many governments place targeted propaganda on all sorts of platforms, the US primary among them. Both US political parties were no doubt doing astroturfing of their own this last election. And among US politicians, having corrupt foreign ties is hardly unique to Trump. Trump probably has some relationship with the Russian government, but IMO it is hardly significant in comparison to the full scope of corrupt, bad behavior exhibited by the US government.
> Totally agree with you. Twitter should be publishing whatever the user wants to convey (unless its violating any local laws). They shouldnt be deciding whats right or wrong based on their personal opinion.
Stop blocking spam, advertising, and government propaganda then.
Absolutist arguments like this have an obvious problem in that certain classes of speech are a problem.
> I despise this quote so much, and I'm far from a Trump supporter. If you need to censor speech in order for your side to win, maybe you have bigger issues than Trump's twitter account.
Stop blocking spam, advertising, legalize government use of propaganda domestically, etc.
No?
Then clearly your position has an obvious flaw in that you have to censor certain classes of speech. All of those happen on Twitter.
There is a difference between a platform (be that a website, or a government) censoring speech, and individuals opting out of certain things.
If I choose, I can view ads and I can view spam. I choose not to, just as it's perfectly fine to not follow Donald Trump on Twitter. I am making the decision about what content I view.
An entity in power making that decision for me is censoring free speech. My choosing not to see things, is not.
The housing bubble was sophisticated investors thinking they swindled unsophisticated investors to some degree.
Private student loans operate similarly and have similar risks. Similarly, you can't _sell_ an education except with a job so if there is even the slightest panic a bunch of people can't pay their loans and the holder of the note can't sell the underlying "education".
> Mueller was asked to stay on as head of the FBI by President Obama, and served in the post all the way to 2013.
I'm aware. You seem to believe it means something more than Obama didn't have any major scandals to worry about that involved the FBI.
> If you're going to accuse him of partisanship, by all means post some citations.
He is a registered Republican that backed the vast majority of their programs that were later found unconstitutional. He only ever pushed back when it involved Bush trying to get a guy in a hospital bed to sign an order overturning one small portion of it.
There isn't any way to "prove" someone is a partisan to people's satisfaction if the man's career doesn't speak for itself already.
The man's career can say many things. To quote the Wikipedia article on him:
"In May 2011, President Obama asked Director Mueller to continue at the helm of the FBI for two additional years beyond his normal 10-year term, which was expiring on September 4, 2011."
and
"Director Mueller, along with Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey, threatened to resign from office in March 2004 if the White House overruled a Department of Justice finding that domestic wiretapping without a court warrant was unconstitutional. Attorney General John D. Ashcroft denied his consent to attempts by White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales to waive the Justice Department ruling and permit the domestic warrantless eavesdropping program to proceed. On March 12, 2004, President George W. Bush gave his support to changes in the program sufficient to satisfy the concerns of Mueller, Ashcroft and Comey."
and
"After leaving the FBI in 2013, Mueller served a one-year term as consulting professor and the Arthur and Frank Payne Distinguished Lecturer at Stanford University where he focused on issues related to cyber-security. He gave a speech and Q&A on March 8, 2017 at Anderson University, where he stated, "For the bureau, one of the most important things is integrity."
The layman who reads such an account of his career would be well-justified in asking how you have reached your conclusion, because the above would indicate that Mueller is recognized as a man of integrity by Presidents from both political parties. So I say again: if you're going to accuse him of partisanship, by all means post some citations.
Snoopy relatives of women I have dated a couple times, a couple times by PIs paid to track me down, and a stalker once.
So...yeah. It's a real problem and none of these people had a legitimate cause to do so. Even beyond FB, etc. I don't post my face online because of shit like that.
Other people have stopped posting pics of me as well, a couple people have been called based on my name being tagged to things on social media.