I’m not sure Disney is a productive company for society. I’d argue that Lebron James and Disney are purely for entertainment. And the owners of sports teams are able to attach value to the players by how many people they’ll draw to TV and stadium viewership and product sales, so Lebron’s value can be pretty well guessed in advance by the team that pays him that huge salary.
This is the Marxist conception of racism, because Marxists believe that any interaction between two people is primarily one of power. People who don't believe that every single interaction they have with someone is predicated on the power struggle between the groups they belong to, have no problem excluding systemic oppression from their definition of racism, because they believe that interactions exist between two individuals. If one individual makes a blanket statement about a person because of a racial group that they belong to, then that's racist, if you believe in the divinity of the individual.
No, it's a concept of racism that originates with people who abandoned Marxism for bourgeois identity politics. The right likes to call it “Marxist” because it originated with former Marxists and exists within a dialectical framework which replaces the Marxist class-conflict framework with a racial-conflict one, but it is very much not—and in some ways fundamentally opposed to—Marxism.
I never said any such thing. They'll still get takedown notices after 6 months, and they'll have to fight them as appropriate. It's just they won't be inviting abuse by people wanting to use them as a free CDN in the way they do right now.
This is why free speech is such an essential right in the United States, and probably contributes to the success it’s had as a country in making things. It’s hard to create when some government can come along and crush your idea. I can’t think of any other country in the world that has fewer limits on speech.
There’s no way to know how many of those were Chinese nationals because the only group with that data is FINCEN. So how exactly did you do this, and which county was it?
The county tax assessor records are public in California. They include the person or entity who is on the hook for paying the property tax and their address. Most homes in Santa Clara county are owned by the people who live in them and their name and the address of the parcel match the title (also a public record). Companies and property managers have the tax bill sent to the company office. Typically (but not always) LLC ownership included the "LLC" in the name so "Snow garden LLC" was a good sign that it was owned by an LLC but if it went to the same address as the parcel we counted it as being the owner. Similarly for trusts (a lot of people put their property into living trusts) and they have the same sorts of rules.
It was possible to just crawl the web for this information however California has tightened things up a bit and made it harder to do so, you can always go into the county clerk's office however and get access there. Realtors use a service which collects this data and I got access to it through a friend who owns a realtor's license.
I’d think that the person who abuses customer privacy would be much lower class than that. I’d much rather work with someone like the WhatsApp founders than a Zuckerberg.
