GG

Interesting definition of a threat.

He doesn't count because he's a data scientist and not a health expert He's my patron saint of this pandemic, and I'd like to rekindle the debate that @TPS and I started way back in March on who would ultimately be proven right - Leavitt/Ginn or Pueyo?

Don’t have their answer yet, but my hunch is that this is mostly timing related. They totaled up the $1,200 stimulus payments that were approved in April and that provided a huge monthly boost to incomes. May will tell a vastly different story.

You should ask them which protest group uses the hammer and sickle as their symbol. Would love to hear the responses.

I'll go out on a limb and predict that this will not lead to a large uptick in serious cases.

I'll check in with our economists.

How can the government justify fining small business owners and churches for small gatherings, while there are thousands of people out in the streets now.

You're also grossly discounting the other side of the equation, which is when good teams play down to the competition. It's far more likely that Washington took the day off as opposed to Sabres being anything close to good.

I have no idea why you keep repeating this. A team that can hang with upper echelon teams wouldn't miss out on a 24 team playoff format.

This is how I remember it.

It is outdated because it was written to mainly address protections for kids accessing porn & other objectionable material - hence the Communications Decency Act. It was also written before social media companies became the dominant global platforms that reside in the netherworld that didn't exist in '95, that is between an ISP (AT&T, Comcast, VZ) and an online information provider (AOL, Prodigy, etc)

That's the rub, the law as currently written is outdated and doesn't really apply.

I don't think they will touch the political hot potato of supporting the buyout shops. You already saw it when there was a lot of pushback to these companies receiving PPP funds. It's a valid argument of whether firms that paid billions of dividends to its owners should be getting federal tax-payer funded aid.

I wouldn't count on that. Fed is "backstopping" it with zero interest rates. The high end of the corporate bond market is going gangbusters, where no additional support is needed. On the other end of the corporate debt pole, are deeply indebted companies that are owned by the buyout shops. Don't expect Fed support for those cases. That's where the defaults are going to come in, because liquidity is starting to evaporate for the weaker companies. S&P just raised their default expectations to 12.5% for 2020 and Moody's is above 13%.

Is Brandon Rielly giving him a lift home?

It's amazing how liberals don't understand what free market means.

Looks like 2020 will blow away the record for investment grade bond issuance. On the other hand, everyone is bracing for massive defaults on the other end of the bond spectrum. A truly bizarre year for the fixed income markets.

Never mind that when the law was written in '96, Section 230 applied to the more traditional interpretation of ISPs, which are the companies that provide access (ATT, VZ Comcast, etc). The law did not consider the vast spread of social networks and that they would look to fall under the ISP umbrella, even they don't provide access. Look for this loophole to be closed as the first legislative step.

Or we can look at the other scary petri dishes that have been festering for well over a month. We're onto week 5 after the Hasid funeral apocalypse. After all, this is a highly insular community that's completely ignored all recommendations. Any day now Williamsburg cases will spike...

And yet Botts opened up his PC with this line of thinking, and is rightfully getting flamed for it

I don't know why you would say that. They are the dominant provider of short form text dissemination, like Google is dominant is search & related apps and Facebook in social media. All turned from information aggregators into gatekeepers & editors. The rules put in place in the '90s & early '00s no longer apply.

It is, and they brought this upon themselves. Once they started picking sides in the political arena, they opened themselves up for more severe actions.

Who's checking the lies? They can't have it both ways, either they are information platforms or content providers. They're being cute by straddling the existing regulations governing online services & media. They've just invited themselves to more regulation to address that pesky middle ground.

The little dilemma that Gene has been ignoring in this thread.

Shouldn't moderation be up to the market then?