How is it any different than the Russian propaganda campaign to get Trump elected? Or was that something you were fine with as well?
When you let a foreign government run an active psyop campaign against your citizens, you’re just begging for instability and chaos.
I mean, yeah? Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press are inalienable rights, sure, but they’re generally intended to extend to citizens. Not foreign governments.
There’s a big difference between a Chinese citizen here on a green card going around saying they love China and a company running an active misinformation campaign on orders from their government.
It’s no different than how the government tried to crack down on Russian election interference. Turns out, hostile nations running psyops campaigns is bad.
Well, the TikTok lawyers kinda said the quiet part out loud during their SCOTUS brief:
Mr. Francisco contended that the government in a free country “has no valid interest in preventing foreign propaganda” and cannot constitutionally try to keep Americans from being “persuaded by Chinese misinformation.” That is targeting the content of speech, which the First Amendment does not permit, he said.
It’s not a great look for your app when your argument before the Supreme Court is “yeah, we’re a propaganda machine for a hostile foreign power, but free speech says you can’t stop us. Neener neener.”
https://brilliant.org/wiki/proof-of-divisibility-rules/
The 7 and 13 rules are pretty cool too.
Yep. If the sun of the numbers is divisible by 3, the number is divisible by three.
Works great for 6 too, as if it’s divisible by 3 and even, the number is divisible by 6.
And 9 is the same thing, but the sum has to be divisible by 9 (e.g. 12384 is divisible by 9 because the sum of the digits is 18, which is divisible by 9)
There’s also good rules for 4 and 8 as well. If the last 2 digits are divisible by 4, the whole number is (e.g. 127924 is divisible by 4 because 24 is) and if the last 3 numbers are divisible by 8, the whole number is (e.g. 12709832 is divisible by 8 because 832 is.)
I might grant questionable, but not super.
I think a large part of why it was a 9-0 decision was that it’s not speech to run a social media site. It’s commerce, plain as day. Congress has the authority to regulate commerce full stop. The fact that China is using that platform to spread misinformation, and then claiming that stopping them from doing so is a 1A violation is just a red herring.
“Money is speech” just means rich people can donate all the money they want to a politician. Not that you can run an otherwise unlawful business because “money is speech and free speech is a thing!”