Youtube is also a monopoly, and therefore needs to be reigned in and told it can no longer unilaterally make decisions like these. I will let Ross Scott explain why (and yes, I know I’ve posted this three times in this comments section, but it needs to be viewed):

No one is disputing that YouTube has the right to control their content, within the limits of the law. I certainly made no such statement. I simply said it is pointless due to the reasons that I stated.

EH, Link to The Root. That site is Breitbart for blacks.

As people that are intimately familiar with the internet, we know that this is stupid. YouTube can’t filter out everything that is potentially dangerous (danger isn’t just about an action, it is an action in a specific context) and even if they did, it is published in plenty of places elsewhere. Plus, this is…

Honestly, with the exception of the very rare (thankfully) set of factors that occurred in Vegas (height, concealment, huge crowd) potential victims of a mass shooter would be better off with the shooter using a bump stock.

While I completely oppose to use of bump stocks, I don’t think we should be banning videos because of outrage. Last thing I checked, these things are still officially legal, so there shouldn’t be anything wrong with posting a video of someone doing something that’s (still) legal

I’ve wanted to say what you did, but coming off my mouth (because it pisses me off) it ends up sounding like Trump. You put it so much more eloquently. So kudos for that. 100% agree with you. I want to give you 100 stars for that comment.

Tl;DR

Eh, I don’t want to silence prima donna players making millions of dollars off of a game, but I do have a problem with disrespecting the flag, anthem, and our country. These players have a unique opportunity to bring racism and inequality to the forefront, but they don’t have to disrespect our country in doing so.

I don’t know, their newest immigration policy goal (merit-based immigration) would result skew primarily Asian and Indian immigrants. If it was racialized, why wouldn’t it skew to make Europeans the most likely?

Explain how this will only affect immigrants of color? Or is this just a baseless assertion?

“If your wife is a member of a minority group, run while you can.”

Particularly a company that disrupts a heavily unionized market.

Uber really needs to get their story straight with who their drivers are. When they reach out to potential drivers, they make it seem like a hobby - “make extra money in just a few hours a week.” Their whole rationale for not doing a whole host of things (including background checks, back in the day) has reseted on…

Nah, my emotions are just fine. It’s Uber business practices I have problems with. There’s a reason they can offer such cheap rates. Other than screwing over their drivers, and patently ignoring all those pesky, costly regulatory measures, and using criminal tactics to crush both competitors, and local legislative…

Gizmodo has a hard-on for bashing Uber. Sometimes Giz spots a company and decides it is evil and needs to die. Giz was doing the same to Chipotle for a while.

Counter point...

What if that electorate is only made up of corporations?

“Secretary of Interior Installs Big Buck Hunter in Cafeteria to Celebrate Conservation.”

Hunters and Anglers provide over a $ billion a year for conservation. Of course, a know few hunters who play that video game, so...