Since when is Rossman controversial? He simply stands on the side of consumer right-to-repair and ownership. Is anyone here against this?

I'm genuinely impressed by this being upvoted here. Big tech and powerful corporate/government interests are destroying our societies. This information needs to be checked and tracked.

This thread's existence appears to be an attempt to keep power where it currently is, with the elites of our society. People here are hating a group of people that barely exist (a super-minority). It's the same on the right; they pick the loudest, craziest leftist groups and say that all people in the left are like that. This is crazy! I voted for Trump and according to many in here I'm essentially a Nazi that wants a fascist dictatorship.

It's pretty disheartening, but at the same time I know there's basically a bunch of bots in here that are trying to pit us against each other. The people in power (government and corporate elites) are scared of us becoming allies and realizing THEY are the ones responsible, not MAGA Republicans, and not extreme leftists. They WANT us to question free speech even though we know better. They'll even reply to me to make it SEEM like there are people that want to limit free speech, but the only people that want to do so are the elites.

Please people wake up. I am not your enemy. The government and corporate elites are scared! They are the ones that need to answer for this. Stop fighting your brothers and sisters and LOOK UP!

I think you misinterpreted their post as anger.

Communism is authoritarian by nature. If everyone doesn't subscribe to the communist ideology, then the model simply doesn't work. This means you literally have no choice in a communist society but to be subjected to it. You also need some sort of authority to enforce the redistribution. Who decides who does that, and who gets what? My opinion is that the only way it'd work is maybe with AI, but even then, those in power will likely just manipulate the technology to continue to benefit themselves.

I wonder if it is in fact learning from people's prompts; I didn't think that was part of the operation. That's a huge design flaw if so.

I might have to take a look at it then. It sounds like they might be prioritizing free speech over censorship.

They had data showing otherwise. They were silenced. I'll keep bringing this up, but the director of the CDC at the time said there was significant evidence to investigate the lab leak theory, but was forcibly sidelined. They seem to have gotten your model backwards. This wasn't the only time it happened, but people will keep crying "sources" since they know it's now difficult to find information that was removed from journal sites, etc.

But somehow the government and corporations doing so is okay?

They were literally just making up arbitrary rules that had nothing to do with science, and saying it WAS based on science. Meanwhile the then director of the CDC said we should investigate if the virus came from a lab as well as if it had a natural origin, and was forcibly sidelined as a result. Don't even try to say they were following the science.

Edit: Also, if you're not even sure what the truth is, what gives you the right to silence people that have a different opinion? It makes no sense. Where is the authority to silence coming from?

Thank you!

In a land where "lies" are suppressed, he who claims to know the truth is king. The sentiment of suppressing lies is perhaps rightous, but who determines the truth? It damn well wasn't scientists during the pandemic.

Edit: hell, even Zuck himself said he was told to censor true information.