It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: facedye
I made that statement because I have seen too many laws that we thought had limited application turn into laws that were much more widely interpreted then we the people had originally thought them to be. To see this law being used already in this manner only suggests to me that in the writing, the intent was much greater than what the public was led to believe.
In the United States, a red flag law is a gun violence prevention law that permits police or family members to petition a state court to order the temporary removal of firearms from a person who may present a danger to others or themselves.
But as you have experience within a private corporation and suggest that in cases such as this they litigate may I ask you is this a common occurrence that people steal corporate information and threaten to go public with it. Is it not possible that within that stolen information there were some tid bits that a long process of litigation would leave open for dispersal and that this ''raid'' was hoping to grab before it became public? What do you think?
originally posted by: Assassin82
Well, there's a reason I don't watch the news or have anything to do with any mainstream websites. But when your search results are ideologically biased....just another day in the U.S. of A.
Scientology has a reputation for hostile action toward anyone who criticizes it in a public forum; executives within the organization have proclaimed Scientology is "not a turn-the-other-cheek religion". Journalists, politicians, former Scientologists and various anti-cult groups have made accusations of wrongdoing against Scientology since the 1960s, and Scientology has targeted these critics - almost without exception - for retaliation, in the form of lawsuits and public counter-accusations of personal wrongdoing. Many of Scientology's critics have also reported they were subject to threats and harassment in their private lives.
Lol, there's no way around saying this so i'm just going to say it - that's a ridiculously totalitarian point of view.
originally posted by: Bloodworth
I got a buddy writing these programs , real weird stuff.
Its Facebook, YouTube, Twitter and many more creating these algorithms.
Let's says someone posts a pro trump comment on YouTube.
The post may only be viewed by half the public while you think its viewed by everyone.
wouldn't you consider that unlawful?
is it wrong or useless to have a bi-weekly rant fest about this serious abuse of power? why would you even bring that up?
and who cares what precedent they're trying to set? if this went down like the OP's link says it did, it's nothing but illegal and deserving of a full investigation.
Judge rules lawsuit accusing Google of bias against conservatives can proceed
By Anna Hopkins | Fox News
A judge has ruled that a class-action lawsuit filed by two former Google employees claiming discrimination on the basis of gender, race and political bias can move forward, and an attorney representing the plaintiffs told "Fox & Friends" that Google has been making every effort to impede the case.
Google prototype for China "complicit in human rights violations"
Cynthia Wong, senior internet researcher with Human Rights Watch, commented: "This is very problematic from a privacy point of view, because it would allow far more detailed tracking and profiling of people's behavior.
The law was written to help to keep control over the populace. That control, though often seen as being in the hands of government, to me is really in the hands of the world wide corporate structure, who happily use governments as tools of their bidding.
originally posted by: MrBuddy
originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
However this is a private enterprise and it is private information, not ours, but the corporations.
But if a company is conspiring to keep its breaking of laws, bribing, and infringing on human rights secret, that’s called conspiracy. Which is not protected by law.
What law breaking is Google accused of doing? None.
Infringing on human rights? None
Much like leftists scream, "Orange man bad!" conservatives scream, " Corporation bad!"
Google is not violating any laws. They are a private company that can make ANY rules it wants. Don't like them...don't use Google.
It is not your right to see search results how YOU feel they should appear. It is Google's right to manipulate any damned thing it wants while flipping you the bird.
I'm not a fan of corporations but I prefer them over thieves that somehow have this moment of altruism and decide (arbitrarily) to undermind their boss. It is not up to HIM to decide what is right or wrong, that is what regulators are for.
I hope the guy gets prosecuted and black balled from ever working again. It's what he deserves.