So the FTC will allow "lawful content" in neutrality. Bullshit. Is this image by Alex Wellerstein, f.ex., "lawful"?pic.twitter.com/o90eOOVxdn
-
@iDroneHD Also, with all new terror laws, I doubt a detailed schematic of a nuclear bomb is clearly lawful. (Even if it's from Wikipedia.)
@Falkvinge @iDroneHD There is nothing in that image which is classified as secret. (The concept of implosion was declassified in 1951.)
-
-
@wellerstein Oh hi! No, it's absolutely not secret. But can you really talk freely about nuclear weapons construction today? @iDroneHD -
@Falkvinge @iDroneHD In the past they tried it and it didn't work out very well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Progressive,_Inc …. -
@wellerstein @iDroneHD Indeed they did. But before the verdict, things were a little complicated for those who eventually won, yes? -
@Falkvinge @iDroneHD But it was certainly sticky in the early days, though the magazine in question realized how good the publicity was. -
@wellerstein (btw, the reason I mentioned your name in the tweet was to satisfy the CC-BY requirement) -
@Falkvinge No problem — I just thought I would clarify. I am a historian of nuclear secrecy.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.