Olives @olives@qoto.org

https://www.aclu.org/news/criminal-law-reform/one-year-later-hope-for-humanity-in-arizona-prisons The use of solitary confinement is concerning. It can be very psychologically damaging. #HumanRights

https://www.iastatedigitalpress.com/jlsc/article/id/16288/
"Introduction: Digital preservation underpins the persistence of scholarly links and citations through the digital object identifier (DOI) system. We do not currently know, at scale, the extent to which articles assigned a DOI are adequately preserved."

"Results: Of the 7,438,037 works examined, there were 5.9 million copies spread over the archives used in this work. Furthermore, a total of 4,342,368 of the works that we studied (58.38%) were present in at least one archive. However, this left 2,056,492 works in our sample (27.64%) that are seemingly unpreserved. The remaining 13.98% of works in the sample were excluded either for being too recent (published in the current year), not being journal articles, or having insufficient date metadata for us to identify the source."

It is, really, ridiculous to see a #NewHampshire cop spewing his anti porn nonsense, worse still, a politician is actually elevating it (and disregarding the #FirstAmendment).

He doesn't know anything. He is pulling crap out of his ass.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault So, why do some studies show lower crime with more porn then?

https://qoto.org/@olives/110462274531891870 A meta analysis of 59 studies concluded it wasn't linked to crime either. A meta analysis is a study where someone studies studies.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2015.1023427 Hell, let's throw in that porn isn't linked to sexism either.

https://reason.com/2015/07/23/despite-all-the-panic-millennial-teens-h/ Also, teens are having less sex with more porn around...

#FreeSpeech #FreeExpression

Someone doesn't like my "non-existent being" language...? Prefer "imaginary character" instead? Hahahahahaha.

I don't have a particular preference here. I merely picked up language which someone else was using to try to convey my point as clearly as possible.

Sometimes, I lack elegance when trying to deal with something urgently.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/04/mpa-doesnt-get-decide-who-first-amendment-protects
"Twelve years ago, internet users spoke up with one voice to reject a law that would build censorship into the internet at a fundamental level. This week, the Motion Picture Association (MPA), a group that represents six giant movie and TV studios, announced that it hoped we’d all forgotten how dangerous this idea was. The MPA is wrong. We remember, and the internet remembers.

What the MPA wants is the power to block entire websites, everywhere in the U.S., using the same tools as repressive regimes like China and Russia. To it, instances of possible copyright infringement should be played like a trump card to shut off our access to entire websites, regardless of the other legal speech hosted there."
#FirstAmendment #copyright #FreeSpeech #FreeExpression

https://reason.com/2024/04/11/come-back-with-a-warrant/
"The reauthorization of a warrantless electronic surveillance tool hit a snag in the House on Wednesday, as a group of Republicans revolted against Speaker of the House Mike Johnson's (R–La.) plan to bring the bill to the floor without guaranteeing the inclusion of key privacy-protecting reforms."

https://freiheitsrechte.org/en/ueber-die-gff/presse/pressemitteilungen/pr_chatcontrol_facebook What do you think of this lawsuit?

It might be easier to get companies to adopt end-to-end encryption (which is more private, secure, and resilient than anything a lawsuit could accomplish).

Making Section 702 worse is not a good idea.

https://reason.com/2024/04/10/a-florida-judge-says-165000-in-fines-for-3-minor-code-violations-is-not-excessive/
"A Florida judge yesterday ruled against a Lantana homeowner who faces more than $165,000 in fines for three minor code violations that harmed no one. Sandy Martinez, who is represented by the Institute for Justice (I.J.), argued that the financially crippling demand, which stems from driveway cracks, a storm-damaged fence, and cars that were parked partially on her own lawn, violates the Florida Constitution's ban on excessive fines and its guarantee of due process."

"But Palm Beach County Circuit Court Judge Luis Delgado granted the city's motion for summary judgment, concluding that the fines were not "grossly disproportionate."

Martinez hopes to persuade Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeal that Delgado is wrong about that."
#HumanRights #EighthAmendment

I imagine a policy like this might impede someone being able to read some progressive publications, among other things.