Section 230 Doesn’t Need “Reform”

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 is under attack — disguised as a cry for “reform” — from politicians on both sides of the “major party” aisle. To what purpose? Well, let’s look at Section 230’s key provision: “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

Autonomous Individualism

Until I heard Professor Ryan, I was in danger of mislabeling myself.  For the past year, I have been confused because I have not been aware of failing to be a voluntaryist, many longtime friends seemed to be going down a garden path, and by implication I was being called unpleasant things since I was taking care of myself.  In other words, I was wearing a mask when it seemed prudent.

Their Own Personal Political Benefit

When government officials order certain types to business to close or to operate only at no more than 25 or 50 percent of capacity, those orders in many cases are tantamount to a death sentence, because many businesses cannot afford to close completely for an indefinite period or to operate far below capacity. The permanent closures of small businesses entail unemployment for many employees and a loss of investment for owners, many of whom worked and saved for years in order to go into business for themselves.

Julieta Returns, Child Problems, Sons & Daughters, Bad People, & Financial Responsibility (37m) – Episode 403

Episode 403 has Skyler and Julieta giving their commentary on the following questions from Quora: “If you are giving complete freedom to your child to live his or her life however they want, if some problem arises should they face it alone?”; “Do fathers treat sons and daughters differently?”; “Are parents really responsible if their child becomes a bad person?”; and “How long are your parents financially responsible for you?”