His grief is that in a bill that incentives building near public transit there’s not a requirement for private parking? That seems weak.
Another senator expressed concerns for the bill that sought to promote building near public transit saying that her district’s light rail went “from nowhere to nowhere.” Maybe you should advance a bill that incentives putting things near public transit?
Do you not believe that Christians exist?
Teenagers from a few different schools would sit under the tree nearest our block of units. They were a bit troublesome sometimes. Usually, they would just smoke cigarettes and the occasional doobie. But other times they’d spray paint tags on our fence or yell smartarse comments at people walking through the park.
So very “scary!” How did you possibly survive before getting to know them?
~~As would I, hence I did. But the quote was from an Israeli official. ~~
I think I might have read the comment I replied to wrong. It seems to me now they were choosing the second option of my original comment.
Oh? Is Israel finally letting Palestinians have free travel so that they actually can leave or is “leave in great numbers” a euphemism for the ongoing genocide?
None of those is a substitute for any other.
Canadian election is today. Who they choose is who’s gonna have to handle or succumb to Trump.
And just like that every American good costs significantly more.
If your family income is less than about $200,000, congratulations, your tax rate has at least doubled.
You’re trying to figure out if the band filling stadia is the “worst band ever?”
[Citation Required]
You could read it, it’s pretty short.
Here’s what the AUP says about porn:
You may not use any of Mozilla’s services to:
- …
- Upload, download, transmit, display, or grant access to content that includes graphic depictions of sexuality or violence,
- …
So yeah, in that sense it “says what it says about porn.” It’s just that “what it says about porn” is in a list of things you can’t use their services for and before the only mention of how to use their “product.”
Through their various agreements and terms Mozilla makes a clear distinction between products and services and has clear guidelines on how you can use them. When the TOS says “obey the AUP” and the AUP says “don’t use our services for porn and don’t sell our products or services” then viewing porn with their product is not a violation of their AUP and thus not a violation of their TOS.
Ultimately, however, the final decision would have to be resolved in court.
The Acceptable Use Policy contains guidelines for services and guidelines for products. The Firefox TOS says “Your use of Firefox must follow Mozilla’s Acceptable Use Policy, and you agree that you will not use Firefox to infringe anyone’s rights or violate any applicable laws or regulations.” The only part of the Acceptable Use Policy that pertains to products is “You also may not sell, resell, or duplicate any Mozilla product or service without written permission from Mozilla.” Mozilla has a separate TOS for their services.
Therefore, you can look at porn in FF as long as you don’t bundle FF in a Linux repo without their written permission, but you can’t look at porn when using their VPN.
My monitor dynamically adjusts it’s refresh rate to match what my GPU is spitting out within reason. Anything above 40ish is fine, though competitive stuff does benefit from more. Below that even if my monitor is matching frame to fame I definitely notice.
The camera module is thicker than the phone and Samsung doesn’t think we want a marginally larger device with a fuck ton more battery and better cameras.
The guys username.
This isn’t one of those instances where freedom of speech is allowed.
I love how you just reiterated your erroneous point verbatim without clarification.
Be respectful of others.
Not sure what that has to do with this discussion or my comment.
Gonna ignore you now since you don’t have an answer to my question.
It seems you don’t actually know what freedom of speech is.
Freedom of speech means the government can’t get you in trouble for what you say.
Freedom of speech does not mean what you have to say is valuable, relevant, or required to be protected, platformed, or promoted by private capital or individuals. Lemmy instances by and large are not products of governments used to curtail your right to say what you want–they’re private entities who’s own freedom of speech and association allow them to make a determination about whether you’re an acceptable entity to keep around.
If you think you’re an acceptable entity to keep around when no one else does, feel free to start your own instance.
Sure it is.
And even if it weren’t that doesn’t make your comment about you getting butt hurt from someone telling you to be better for seeking out where you can be a bigot any less ironic.
Perhaps you should rephrase your post then to indicate you’re actually interested in bigotry affirming instances instead of instances that refrain from being a government entity that controls expression.
They are different.
Pretty much any Lemmy instances I suspect supports freedom of speech. There’s not really any evidence that admins are colluding with the feds to control what you say.
What may be happening is admins deciding of their own volition to not platform certain types of comments. Notably that doesn’t stop you or anyone else from saying whatever; it just means you gotta do it somewhere else, like your own instance.
Olauncher