Group items tagged

"This week, those reminders include a collection of newly released documents suggesting that the company adopted a host of features and policies even though it knew those choices would harm users and undermine innovation."

"NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said Wednesday that owners voted to fine teams if players do not stand during the national anthem, but players, previously mandated to be on the field for the anthem, can instead opt to remain in the locker room."

"The Google-owned company also removed 100,000 videos, a spike in takedowns since its new hate speech policy went into effect in June."

it seems kind of stupid to me that they would do that usually they will give people a warning to take down the video that violates there rules but I guess they decided to just give up on them.

I think that the arguments arising around Youtube, Facebook, etc. are interesting. Because, while they are private corporations with the ability to regulate their material how they please, they are also communication platforms. And being communication platforms, they have to conform to certain laws. They have to guarantee everyone a right to be seen and heard.

Even if his approval rating drops at all, I don't believe people are going to stop saying he's a "great" president.

I think it's interesting that the article claims Americans are bracing for a recession. We have a record high DOW Jones stock, unemployment is decreasing (more than 20 million new jobs since 2010), and Americans, in general, have more money in their pockets than we did 3 years ago. https://ig.ft.com/sites/numbers/economies/us/ It also piques my interest that the article claims the Trump approval rating as a whole is falling. After the democratic debates, Donald Trump has only increased in followership, rally attendance, etc. This is the reason people keep saying he's a "great" president. You might not like him as a person, I might not like him as a person, but if he continues to put a dent in the public debt, and continues to uphold basic constitutionalist ideals, he will continue to see success in America. I think it's interesting and I predict that the 2020 election will play out very similarly to the 2016 election. The democratic party did everything in their power to stop Trump from becoming president. Both Republicans and Democrats alike turned to personal attacks and scandals. Even if all the candidates are bad, we have to pick the best one. Trump was able to win against the Democrats because they didn't have any solid plans with evidence for the policies they wanted to implement. Trump has an upper-hand because he's never changed too. Democrats have flipped like no other when it comes to policies because they are desperate to be approved of by the younger masses. Trump has always supported a smaller government, focused on the economy, and wanted stricter foreign relations. The same cannot be said about Democrats, their talking points are that of enabling a welfare state, stripping citizens of their 2nd amendment rights, and their false sense of acceptance. tl;dr: orange man bad, but doing his job well.

I think there are some things the school or parents have the right to do. The parents have the right to send them to whatever school they and their child choose. The school has the right to restrict the child from doing certain things that could result in a code of conduct brake. According to the government, they say a child must attend school until they are 18 and are considered an adult. I believe that is all the government should be allowed to do. It's then up to the student to continued their education or go into the workforce.

I think that the government's power should be to help people get an education, but it's up to the parents and students to decide where to go and if they want to go on for more schooling. For some jobs, college might not help as much as a trade school, and that's a decision for the parents and student to decide.

We should all know this is not going to happen. This is more of a state tantrum about wanting their state rights back. Personally I agree completely with the states that are doing this because the federal government is way past the boundary. The federal government is in place to protect us from others not are self's.

Jeremy, what am I trying to state, is that states do have a right to secede, because we are not in a perpetual agreement to join the union. It was perpetual during the Articles of Confederation, the supreme court ruled that they have do not know if the constitution. "It was confirmed and strengthened by the necessities of war, and received definite form and character and sanction from the Articles of Confederation. By these, the Union was solemnly declared to 'be perpetual.' And when these Articles were found to be inadequate to the exigencies of the country, the Constitution was ordained 'to form a more perfect Union.' It is difficult to convey the idea of indissoluble unity more clearly than by these words." English: The Articles of Confederation declared it to be a perpetual union. The Articles of Confederation no longer exist. The supreme court literally state that they are going by ground of the Articles of Confederation, a.k.a. not a valid ground to take a stance upon. Now, if we look in history. plessy v. ferguson was a supreme court case that was overturned. This case can be overturned. Also, Jeremy, your understanding is correct on most of it. But from what the case as a whole states, under the Articles of Confederation, what you states is Valid. The Court ruled this with the usage of the Articles of Confederation. (Personally, do not think you should be able to do that, and that the courts ruling is a mistake.) Finally, I am simply stating the states have a right to secede if they want to, this is because the constitution, and not the articles of confederation, is vague about the idea of secession, applying the 10th amendment, the states should have a right to secede if they have a majority of people, unless we plan to be a hypocritical society that has already forced others to use the policy in which most people want to deny.

I think this in an interesting topic. The idea of states attempting to secede from the union is mind blowing. We know our government is faulty and far from flawless... but in comparison to others, we find it to be the strongest. We defend such a government, yet there are states that want to withdraw from it! I would actually like to look into this topic a little more, so I can understand all factors in the state's decisions!

Justia columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry Colb comments on a discrimination case in which the Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center fired a Customer Service Representative, Sakile S. Chenzira, for refusing to get a seasonal flu vaccine, in contravention of hospital policy.

I think that all people should have to pay the same tax rate.

"The Supreme Court accepts only a fraction of the appeals submitted to it, and in May it declined to review the case of Joel Tenenbaum, who like Thomas-Rasset is still fighting the recording industry in court."

i did the math so over the company lost over 9000 customers if the song cost was 24$

When we use something from the school like a uniform or a book and it isn't returned we are fined the price of the item. I lose my basketball uniform, I pay $40. How come when this women takes something that is worth 24$ she must pay 10,000x what it is worth to the owner?

I am curious if you agree or disagree with the decision. Here are excerpts from three documents the school district has sent me about the decision.

In response to Payton W: If an employee would get fired for wasting company time on Facebook, what is a logical penalty for teachers/administrators to administer to those who refuse to work? It is hardly a solution to take the computer away, since there is so much effort placed on getting kids to use them for class work. Of course we cannot "fire" our students like an employee. Following your logic, shouldn't "moving on to the next thing" also get you the same penalty? Isn't the real issue students wasting time (whatever it might be)?

Mr. Pregon, the personal issue with this is, we can't go around blocking things all the time, that does not teach good choice-making skills. I know that one solution, that may only work in some situations, is that, make them do it by hand. I've seen teachers use this before, and noticed quiet a bit improvement on students taking it upon themselves to avoid facebook. Mr. Nelson, in Algebra 2 made someone solve a 3 variable question using Matrices by hand, which can take about 10 minutes for a single problem. That student has not been on facebook in his class, or at least caught, since. As for penalties, students do have privileged that teachers may take away, such as going to the bathroom during class. Although, that is unlikely to affect most students, it is hard to say whether or not that will have much affect. Perhaps a major punishment such as Monday school if caught so many times? I have no direct answer as to how this should work though.

"By most accounts, Republican challenger Mitt Romney was the clear winner of Wednesday's first debate with President Barack Obama. Romney engaged the incumbent while Obama looked down at his lectern. The challenger was a more forceful debater while Obama appeared less than engaged." Here are five things we learned on Wednesday"

I have watched other things like speeches and looked online. But this post is strictly just about the debate and to me Mitt Romney won. Now, I understand there is no actual winner and I'm not saying you guys are wrong, but going by just this debate, Romney without a doubt won.

Alex, if there is no actual winner than how did he win? that's contradicting yourself. I agree that Romney presented himself better at the debate but outside of the debate I believe Obama has and you believe Romney has we are just going to have to agree to disagree

At issue is the "cost sharing" provision in the law that requires insurance companies offering health plans through the law to reduce out-of-pocket costs for policy holders who qualify. The government offsets the added costs to insurance companies by reimbursing them. But lawyers for the House argued that Congress did not properly approve the money for those reimbursements.

This suit represents the first time in our nation's history that Congress has been permitted to sue executive branch over a disagreement about how to interpret a statute," Earnest said during his daily briefing. "These are the kinds of political disputes that characterize a democracy. It's unfortunate that Republicans have resorted to a taxpayer-funded lawsuit to re-fight a political fight they keep losing.

"Virginia high school students suspended for wearing Confederate flag apparel"

It is important for schools to want and try to create a safe and learning environment for their students, and different students had different beliefs and ideas based on their own color and race.

I think that the school taking away this could of had an affect on how the kids reacted. If you think about it when someone tells you not to do something you have a slight urge to go against what they are saying. These kids probably wanted to do the same thing, maybe just because they wanted to get under their skin, not because they were standing up for what they believe in.

"Donald Trump is traveling to Mexico Wednesday to meet with the country's president just hours before he is set to deliver a speech focused on immigration policy."

After reading about this topic, to me it seems like Trump is playing the election "game" better than Hilary as he has continuous spot light. For instance he has many times said that he would build this great wall. Often enough though as trump says this, the Mexican President has rebutted that Mexico will not build the wall or will not pay for the building either.

Donald Trump flew into a nation he has constantly berated during his campaign to meet President Enrique Peña Nieto and said they discussed a wall Trump has vowed to build on the US southern border, but not his demand that Mexico pay for it -- an assertion the Mexican president later disputed.

President-elect Donald Trump has disclosed owning millions of dollars of stock in companies with business pending before the U.S. government and whose value could rise as a result of his policies.

"President Obama Claims He Cannot Pardon Snowden; He's Wrong"

On the idea of pardoning Snowden, I agree with Nate because although the information he had should have been told to the public, just in a different way, he broke major laws, so there must be consequences. And going off of Devin's idea of no fair trial is inevitable.

I agree with Lauren because the president has enough authority to make those decisions.

In a speech at a foreign policy conference in Moscow, Putin said "during my recent telephone conversation with Mr. Donald Trump, our opinions coincided that the current, unsatisfactory state of Russia-US relations, undoubtedly must be straightened out. As I already have said, our country is prepared to go down our part of that road."