@joshdh.bsky.social
I assume this refers to the 1976 nationalization. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...
History of U.S. involvement in Venezuela's petroleum industry - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
December 17, 2025 at 12:41 AM
I assume this refers to the 1976 nationalization. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...
Reposted
And finally, the assault on Section 230. This is the endgame for independent speech.
If you repeal 230, you don’t hurt Google or Meta—they have the lawyers to survive. You destroy the small forums, the independent blogs, the dissenters. You make the cost of speaking the truth too high to bear.
If you repeal 230, you don’t hurt Google or Meta—they have the lawyers to survive. You destroy the small forums, the independent blogs, the dissenters. You make the cost of speaking the truth too high to bear.
How Democrats’ Attack On Section 230 Plays Right Into Trump’s Censorial Plans
Like clockwork, lawmakers are once again rallying around the idea of eliminating Section 230. That Republicans are leading this charge is hardly surprising—repealing Section 230 is explicitly laid …
www.techdirt.com
December 14, 2025 at 9:11 PM
And finally, the assault on Section 230. This is the endgame for independent speech.
If you repeal 230, you don’t hurt Google or Meta—they have the lawyers to survive. You destroy the small forums, the independent blogs, the dissenters. You make the cost of speaking the truth too high to bear.
If you repeal 230, you don’t hurt Google or Meta—they have the lawyers to survive. You destroy the small forums, the independent blogs, the dissenters. You make the cost of speaking the truth too high to bear.
Lots of possibilities, but how about @profmmurray.bsky.social
@kateshaw.bsky.social &
@stevevladeck.bsky.social
@kateshaw.bsky.social &
@stevevladeck.bsky.social
December 13, 2025 at 9:02 PM
Lots of possibilities, but how about @profmmurray.bsky.social
@kateshaw.bsky.social &
@stevevladeck.bsky.social
@kateshaw.bsky.social &
@stevevladeck.bsky.social
Reposted
If f you look at the language of these laws, it's entirely subjective and can be employed against a wide variety of content, as it has historically.
The vagueness is a problem for speech, but not for censors. The vagueness gives them power.
The vagueness is a problem for speech, but not for censors. The vagueness gives them power.
December 11, 2025 at 12:30 AM
If f you look at the language of these laws, it's entirely subjective and can be employed against a wide variety of content, as it has historically.
The vagueness is a problem for speech, but not for censors. The vagueness gives them power.
The vagueness is a problem for speech, but not for censors. The vagueness gives them power.
As long as it ended by thanking you for your attention to this matter.
November 15, 2025 at 11:55 PM
As long as it ended by thanking you for your attention to this matter.