As a computer professional, I do not believe that to be a secure method, no matter how it's done.

It will be interesting to see if the runoff in Georgia is a Republican landslide once they stop using dominion

And that statement would also apply to online banking, paying your taxes online etc. I assume you do none of those.

I would say it is not secure, the only reason you personally do not get hacked if there are so many other people to hack.

Paper ballots and only paper ballots.

That is the most secure

I'm not so sure paper ballots are enough, paper ballots and you only get to vote with facial recognition software.

Online voting is insecure because computers can be hacked therefore we must use computers for facial recognition to make our elections secure, huh?

But there will at least be a face attached to each vote

We could in addition require everyone to bring their birth certificate, we can keep going, how crazy do you want to get?

Crazy enough so I can vote online

I think Trump wants 230 repealed so that he can hold FB and Twitter accountable under his 2018 executive order. Election interference is a national security issue.

Just my guess.

Im sure he was planning his defence ever since he got in office

My guess is he doesn't like being censored on Twitter

he needs to make his own media platform

I am sure he doesn’t. Who would like be censored of Twitter? My point is, I think his legal argument starts there at section 230

amber alerts get sent to everyone's phone he could do something like that to get his message out

Not my phone. I turned that off.

Good, we should be able to turn off stuff we don't want to listen to

@Repeat "Marsh v. Alabama :: 326 U.S. 501 (1946) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center" https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/326/501/

I'm an agreement that this should be looked at. If social media platforms are going to edit content then they should be subject to liability for that content.

The straw that broke the camel's back was that I was getting alerts for stuff that was happening a thousand miles away.

Lets say you own your own website and people were posting stuff you disagreed with should you be required to leave it on your websight?

@Jorgen Johnson, you just advanced to level 11!

Im just thinking a once a month update maybe a page long and you can turn it off if you want.

No and there's nothing that requires you to leave that content on. But the big social media platforms claim not to edit content and therefore not be subject to liability for said content. Yet they do seem to edit content now and thus should be held liable.

The whole purpose of an amber alert was to give you immediate notice that something local had happened. Say some kid had just been kidnapped or gone missing in your neighborhood. But when they're sending me alerts for stuff that's happening a thousand miles away that's not helpful.

We could call it a presidential alert

I am not understanding the relevancy here. Please connect the dots for me

I personally signed up to receive Trumps Text messages but he sent out so many I stopped it because it was too much , he needs to do a once a week or once month alert

I think there is one already set up?

I think I was able to turn that one off also

Same. I vaguely remember that

If he does not want to get censored he needs to send out a one page update once a week instead of two or three times a day.

I don’t think an acting President should ever be censored to begin with.

@Repeat, you just advanced to level 11!

I agree

Maybe congress should start there. Stoping president censorship

Try 10 times a day https://www.statista.com/chart/19561/total-number-of-tweets-from-donald-trump/

"How the CIA made Google. Inside the secret network behind mass… | by Nafeez Ahmed | INSURGE intelligence | Medium" https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-google-e836451a959e