I can share a story about heart palpitations: I started having them in ~2008 without any previous infection (that I know of). Interestingly enough, they were appearing when my heart rate was going down - most noticeably while I was lying in bed trying to sleep, which isn't easy if your heart starts "missing some beats" out of the blue! Went to various doctors, they couldn't find anything wrong with my heart, but couldn't find anything that could help me get rid of the palpitations either. Then, in 2010, I got chickenpox, which at age 36 is a pretty big deal, with high fever, blisters all over the body etc. That took two weeks, and after that my palpitations were gone, and haven't returned since (knock on wood, fingers crossed etc.). So I can only assume that I had some form of myocarditis and the high fever got rid of that too?! No idea...
We already do that ourselves naturally as an organism, as does the environment around us.
A simple synthetic cell is so far off from the myriad of potentially deadly cellular organisms(or even deadly malformed protein chains) that already exist and evolve right this instant that it's not worth a second thought in the context of "organisms that can kill us" for now.
You can already sue them. For example, if Fox runs a segment claiming that you (gulli1010) are a murderer, you can sue them for slander (with or without this executive order).
If someone tweets that you are a murderer, you can't sue Twitter (or rather, if you do, Twitter will be protected by Section 230).
However, suppose Twitter announces the following policy: "Any tweet which calls someone a murderer, shall be deleted, unless the alleged murderer is gulli1010". Should you be allowed to sue Twitter then? That's a more nuanced question. And what if the above policy isn't an official policy but is a de facto policy?
People should look into the Seth Rich lawsuit and Ed Butowsky. Trump forgets his crowd is the one who constantly panders conspiracy theories like PizzaGate and QAnon. This will effectively take them down entirely.
No one side has a monopoly on conspiracy theories. The Russia collusion was something spun for years by the networks where people under oath said one thing privately and another publicly.
Yes, but at the cost of the entire platform. I’d doubt that Twitter could sustain being endlessly sued over user posts. They’d die the death of a thousand cuts. And a lot of conservatives would be perfectly happy with that.
