this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
615 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

58713 readers
3982 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemm.ee
fry@fry.gs
L3s@fry.gs
enu@lemmy.world
L4s@fry.gs
L4s@lemmy.world
615
22 Democrats Sponsor a Bill That Could Censor Abortion Info From the Internet (jezebel.com)
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
82 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

22 Democrats Sponsor a Bill That Could Censor Abortion Info From the Internet::The Kids Online Safety Act is “a blank check” for Republican AGs to "intimidate any way they can," a digital civil liberties advocate told Jezebel.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Spendrill@lemm.ee 61 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This isn't about kids and it isn't about abortion it's about limiting people's access to unmediated information. The Democrats have just as much to lose as the Republicans if a third party which is a lesser evil than either emerges. Or, seeing as this is America we're talking about, greater evil.

Whatever. They don't want people being able to just organise themselves as they please online.

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

If you can only vote for one option then the better a 3rd party does the more it hurts the main party closest to it. I would expect Democrats and Republicans to be funding 3rd parties in the hopes of improving their chances of getting the most votes.

[–] WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

For the 2020 election in my state, republican groups funded the campaign to collect signatures for the green party to be on the ballot. So your expectations are met.

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

It is depressing when people get less representation in their government by voting for a party they want the most to represent them (or worse; the only party they want, or even worse: not having the option of voting "none of these, do this again").

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip -3 points 1 year ago

I think that was to keep votes away from the Democrats but its still interesting

[–] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Republicans have funded the Green Party for a long time now at least. I wouldn’t be surprised if Dems were funding the libertarian party.

[–] Spendrill@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Was there ever proof that the Republicans donated to Nader in the 2000 election? Seems they did just about everything they could to deny the popular vote...

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I'm not American so I wouldn't know. Do you have 2 votes, 1 for president and 1 for insert noun here?

[–] Spendrill@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Barking up the wrong tree, I'm a Londoner.