Summary of “Marc Randazza Is Fighting To Keep Nazis And Trolls On Twitter In The New Speech Wars. Here’s Why.”

The contemporary fight over free speech beliefs occurs in a dense fog created by the constant conflation of federal speech laws and private speech rules.
“Am no fan of Jones …but who the hell made Facebook the arbiter of political speech? Free speech includes views you disagree with. #1A.” That tweet, of course, conflates two very different things: platform policies, which exist to protect businesses, and the First Amendment, which exists to protect speech.
It’s a sign of how confusing the debate over online speech is, and how it scrambles political categories, that some conservatives want government regulation of internet speech platforms, while many liberals and members of the press have called for more unilateral censorship by the very same companies.
Free speech is central to the identity of at least one of these platforms, Twitter, which was famously described by executives as “The free speech wing of the free speech party.” And users across platforms have what Klonick calls “Free speech expectations”: Norms around free expression, which, if violated egregiously enough in either direction, could lead them to abandon a platform.
It’s a move away from a time-tested speech principle and toward a trendy profusion of speech rules – rules that they say are bound to boomerang on young liberals who don’t remember past speech wars.
Just as Marc Randazza formed his beliefs around free speech in a liberal culture that lionized the First Amendment for protecting Vietnam protesters and Larry Flynt, young people in 2018 are forming their opinion of free speech in a moment when those most loudly claiming its virtues are conspiratorial grifters like Alex Jones and racists like Andrew Anglin and Richard Spencer.
Even assuming no change in popular support for free speech principles and absent regulation, there’s very little, besides their own squeamishness, to stop social platforms from developing their own speech codes to a place that excludes much of the far right.
In not just representing, but rhetorically casting in with the loudest, least sympathetic, and least sincere people to claim the firstness of the First Amendment – people whose speech is totally unthreatened by the current federal government – Marc Randazza may be helping to hurry the process by which young Americans come to see a guiding cultural principle as a cynical tool.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Yuval Noah Harari: the myth of freedom”

Theologians developed the idea of “Free will” to explain why God is right to punish sinners for their bad choices and reward saints for their good choices.
If our choices aren’t made freely, why should God punish or reward us for them? According to the theologians, it is reasonable for God to do so, because our choices reflect the free will of our eternal souls, which are independent of all physical and biological constraints.
Humans certainly have a will – but it isn’t free.
If governments succeed in hacking the human animal, the easiest people to manipulate will be those who believe in free will.
In order to survive and prosper in the 21st century, we need to leave behind the naive view of humans as free individuals – a view inherited from Christian theology as much as from the modern Enlightenment – and come to terms with what humans really are: hackable animals.
If humans are hackable animals, and if our choices and opinions don’t reflect our free will, what should the point of politics be? For 300 years, liberal ideals inspired a political project that aimed to give as many individuals as possible the ability to pursue their dreams and fulfil their desires.
If we understood that our desires are not the outcome of free choice, we would hopefully be less preoccupied with them, and would also feel more connected to the rest of the world.
Second, renouncing the myth of free will can kindle a profound curiosity.

The orginal article.

Summary of “So, Is Paul George Out on the Thunder?”

If LeBron is the first and highest-profile domino to fall, then Paul George will be the second.
A free agent after spending a year in Oklahoma City, George has been angling to get to Los Angeles for years.
“There is a growing belief around the league that Oklahoma City has a far better chance to retain the free agent-to-be Paul George than many believed when the Thunder crashed out of the first round of the playoffs.”
It feels far-fetched to think that George will actually go somewhere other than L.A., but what if LeBron signs a one-year deal in Cleveland again? George could delay his departure by another year and re-sign with the Thunder for a short stint.
There’s the extremely speculative side of things, the one that is based on appearances like, say, George showing up with Lakers rookie Josh Hart to a Fortnite event in Los Angeles and being asked about joining Hart on the Lakers this summer.
LA. A post shared by Josh Hart on Jun 12, 2018 at 8:20pm PDT. The irony in all of this is that if LeBron selects Los Angeles as his next destination, and George does too, there’s a substantial chance the roster overhaul might cost Hart his position on this team.
If LeBron doesn’t sign with the Lakers, well George could still go “Home” and make them into a playoff team.
George seems much more comfortable as a second fiddle than as the main act.

The orginal article.

Summary of “The Best Disney World Travel Tips From Our Readers”

This week we hacked a theme park instead of a city, with a frankly intimidating 275 comments full of tips on visiting Disney World.
Save money”Bring your own food and drinks. Disney allows coolers and bags up to a certain size into the park but you are free to bring food and drinks into the park. Also, anywhere you can get fountain soft drinks will give you free cups of water.”-gatorbait28.
“If you’re going for more than 10 days over a 1 year period, the annual pass is the best deal. Annual passholders receive free parking at the parks. You also receive a discount at some dining locations and on some merchandise.”-PurpleWaterBottle.
It’s for guaranteeing spots at the best restaurants, and saving yourself the time and decision-making process once you get into the park.
Plan ahead”Make sure to book your 3 fast passes before going to the park. If you are staying at a resort on property, you can book fast passes up to 60 days in advance. If you are not staying on property, you can book fast passes up to 30 days in advance.”-gatorbait28.
“Once you decide to go on a trip, if you have a Target Red card, start buying Disney gift cards. You will get 5% off the face value. You can use the gift cards for anything in the parks, including food. We think of the cards as the Disney ‘savings’ account.”-Ron Jones.
“Animal Kingdom is notorious for having rare characters standing outside of their park entrance. We always make sure to pay attention to the right side when entering or leaving the park because you never know who you’ll see.”-Mel.”At Magic Kingdom, one great way to pass up the time when it’s crowded is to do the Sorcerers of the Magic Kingdom card game. It’s fun for kids and adults alike and you get some souvenir cards for free. You can get a pack of cards per person per day.”-echo125488.
“There are a ton of incredibly designed and themed resorts that are a treat just to explore. You can spend a whole day hopping from one resort to the next. If they ask why you’re there, tell them you’re eating at their full service restaurant. You can take buses either from the parks or Disney Springs. The best resorts are on the monorail in front of Magic Kingdom: The Grand Floridian, the Polynesian, and the Contemporary.”-mouseclicker.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Chief Justice Roberts Is Reshaping The First Amendment”

Whichever way the rulings come down this spring and summer, it’s almost certain that the winning side will include Chief Justice John Roberts, who has spent his 12-plus years at the helm of the high court quietly carving out a space as a prolific and decisive arbiter of free speech law.
Roberts has authored more majority opinions on free speech than any other justice during his tenure, signaling that this is an area where he wants to create a legacy.
Chief Justice Roberts assigns more speech cases to himself Free speech-related* Supreme Court cases, by author of the majority opinion, 2005-16.
Roberts has presided over – and participated in – a deliberate and systematic expansion of free speech rights in the realm of campaign finance and commercial speech.
The court’s determination that campaign spending limits on corporations violated free speech in the 2010 case Citizens United v. FEC was just one in a series that struck down a range of campaign finance laws on First Amendment grounds and expanded corporations’ right to speech in other venues, like drug advertising and trademark regulations.
Although the Roberts court seems to be interpreting free speech in a new way with these decisions, some historians say that free speech has always been ideologically flexible.
According to Laura Weinrib, a historian and professor of law at the University of Chicago, corporate titans like the Ford Motor Company were part of the early push for broader free speech protections precisely because they recognized the power of the First Amendment for advancing their own causes, while organizations like the ACLU strategically accepted a “Neutral” vision of free speech that protected the strong as well as the weak in order to secure early victories for labor rights.
There’s disagreement about whether the Roberts court, by upholding these government restrictions on speech, is undermining its reputation as a court dedicated to a broad view of free speech.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Zach Lowe 2018 NBA trade deadline preview”

At the same time, who is trading a first-round pick to rent Favors, Rodney Hood, Tyreke Evans, Lou Williams, or any other potential difference-maker on an expiring deal? Only a few teams can talk themselves into having any shot against Golden State or Houston, and a few of those – Toronto, Oklahoma City, even the Rockets themselves – already forked over first-rounders in prior trades.
Zach talks to ESPN’s Adrian Wojnarowski about the chaos in Cleveland, what to expect out of several teams at the trade deadline and much more.
Zach Lowe looks at what’s next for a team with one superstar and lots of questions.
Take the Magic: They’d love to get off the horrific deal that will pay Bismack Biyombo $17 million per year through 2019-20, but why should they give up any draft picks to do it now? They stink, they’re OK stinking to chase the No. 1 pick, and they aren’t in danger of going over the tax this season or next.
Rival executives say the Cavs are acting as if they are not going to trade the Nets pick.
Marc Gasol makes a ton of sense as a Nets pick target, but the Grizzlies appear happy to stand pat; the two teams have had no dialogue about any Gasol-centric deal, per league sources.
That’s why two weeks ago on a Lowe Post podcast, I pitched the idea of swapping the Nets pick for Aaron Gordon.
The Wolves have been cautious even discussing the 2018 first-round pick they own via the Thunder, sources have said.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Driverless Cars Could Make Transportation Free for Everyone-With a Catch”

Realtors could pay to have the cars drive slowly past featured properties for sale, past the nice new elementary school in the slightly more affluent neighborhood.
The system benefits drivers at the passengers’ expense.
Will replacing the human driver with an autonomous car shift the equation in the passenger’s favor? Not necessarily.
Currently, neither the irate neighbors nor city planners have much recourse: The roads are public and the cars driven by individuals, making intricate congestion pricing and driving zones infeasible.
The relationship among businesses, passengers, and drivers is different.
Payments from a business to a driver in return for redirecting people are a way for businesses to align the drivers’ incentives with their own.
In the case of the Las Vegas taxis, the passengers still have recourse: The drivers operate independently, and passengers are capable of directing them to a preferred location.
Once independent drivers are replaced with autonomous vehicles under the control of a monolithic routing algorithm, if the company that controls the algorithm has special relationships with businesses, it can wield far more influence on where people shop and eat, on what they see-and where they do not go.

The orginal article.

Summary of “LeBron James’ free agency future unknown, but Los Angeles Lakers holding out hope”

Paul, of course, also represents the biggest star in the NBA – LeBron James – who is expected to become a free agent after the season.
Enter salary cap space, which the Lakers have made little secret they intend to use to pursue superstar players – like James and Southern California native Paul George – in free agency next summer.
History also offers lessons on the difficulty of projecting James’ intentions in free agency.
LeBron James has been a free agent four times in his 15-year NBA career.
LeBron James said he sees parallels between his rookie experience and that of Lakers point guard Lonzo Ball.
Also sticking to past protocol, James himself has resisted any attempt to comment on his impending free agency.
Three key players – Paul, Clint Capela and Trevor Ariza – will be free agents next summer, and there isn’t enough room for all of them if James gets his max.
That’s the reason James and George, the other marquee free agent next summer, have been linked.

The orginal article.

Summary of “AI isn’t giving us more choices-it’s limiting them instead”

In our quest for convenience, we are trading away our free choice.
Our lives become more and more subtly influenced and molded by the companies we let make decisions for us.
In this way, the salient tradeoff in the AI age is not privacy, but choice itself.
Shopping online gives us the convenience of searching a catalog of billions of products from our couch-but more often only shows us our recent searches, purchases, and similar products based off them.
Not only are our choices narrowed by monetary incentives-they are narrowed by the use of algorithms that put us into what statistics calls “Clusters,” which are groups with similar behavior profiles.
As AI narrows our choices, will it keep our careers on a single track? Will it guide our lives so that we meet only like-minded people, with whom we get along, and thus deprive us of the encounters and frictions that compel us to evolve into different, perhaps better human beings?
If we trade more and more choice for convenience, we shut out other people’s divergent points of view and rest in the comfort of our cluster.
Choice and free agency deserve a top spot in the AI age.

The orginal article.

Summary of “Two Concepts of Freedom of Speech”

The reason that appeals to the First Amendment cannot decide these campus controversies is because there is a more fundamental conflict between two, very different concepts of free speech at stake.
The two ancient concepts of free speech came to shape our modern liberal democratic notions in fascinating and forgotten ways.
Understanding that there is not one, but two concepts of freedom of speech, and that these are often in tension if not outright conflict, helps explain the frustrating shape of contemporary debates, both in the U.S. and in Europe-and why it so often feels as though we are talking past each other when it comes to the things that matter most.
Of the two ancient concepts of free speech, isegoria is the older.
The 1689 English Bill of Rights secured “The freedom of speech and debates in Parliament,” and so applied to members of Parliament only, and only when they were present in the chamber.
Over the course of two millennia, the Enlightenment finally united isegoria and logos in an idealized concept of free speech as freedom only for reasoned speech and rational deliberation that would have made Plato proud.
Efforts in Europe to criminalize hate speech owe an obvious debt to Kant, who described the freedom of speech in public as “The most harmless” of all.
Debates about free speech on American campuses today suggest that the rival concepts of isegoria and parrhesia are alive and well.

The orginal article.