You mean the site co-founded by Assange who signed a SF312?

Correct on that last part.

Why should foreign nations care about US laws? Any extradition by any nation is a courtesy at best.

However it is ludicrous to say US should drop charges.

Those newspapers did not sign a legally binding SF312 CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT of which every single person who holds a clearance must sign.

The very first sentence is:

Intending to be legally bound, I hereby accept the obligations contained in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted access to classified information.

Other parts being

I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information

In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, title 18, United States Code; *the provisions of section 783(b}, title 50, United States Code; and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.

Unless and until I am released in writing by an authorized representative of the United States Government, I understand that all conditions and obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply during the time I am granted access to classified information, and at all times thereafter.

This contract is binding FOR LIFE unless waived by an official.

https://www.gsa.gov/reference/forms/classified-information-nondisclosure-agreement-1

Title is a pretty dumb take.

Publishing is not a crime, which is correct.

I cannot be charged with a crime for making posts on Reddit, Lemmy or wiki pages. (I absolutely can be charged by publishing to wiki leaks though under agreements)

Publishing classified information is treason under Title 18 of the U.S. Code, Section 798

This is just stupidly obvious.

The only good thing he did was bring to focus the problem with over classification of information. We now have Controlled Unclassified Information thanks to that.

Looks like a computer vision fever dream

This is a ridiculously off target response

OK then.

Let’s sit down and read the actual amendment instead of taking out of context a section of some news quote which is likeky already out of context by said news before you shortened it.

https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/118th-congress/house-report/142

32. An Amendment To Be Offered by Representative Crane of Arizona or His Designee, Debatable for 10 Minutes

At the end of subtitle G of title X, insert the following:

SEC. 5__. PROTECTION OF IDEOLOGICAL FREEDOM.

Section 2001 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:

© Protection of Ideological Freedom.–(1) No employee of the Department of Defense or of a military department, including any member of the armed forces, may compel, teach, instruct, or train any member of the armed forces, whether serving on active duty, serving in a reserve component, attending a military service academy, or attending a course conducted by a military department pursuant to a Reserve Officer Corps Training program, to believe any of the politically-based concepts referred to in paragraph (4).

(2) No employee of the Department of Defense or of a military department, including any member of the armed forces may be compelled to declare a belief in, or adherence to, or participate in training or education of any kind that promotes any of the politically-based concepts referred to in paragraph (4) a condition of recruitment, retention, promotion, transfer, assignment, or other favorable personnel action.

(3) The Department of Defense and the military departments may not promote race-based or ideological concepts that promote the differential treatment of any individual or groups of individuals based on race, color, sex, or national origin, including any of politically-based concepts referred to in paragraph (4).

(4) A politically-based concept referred to in this paragraph is any of the following:

      (A) Members of one race, color, sex, or national 
    origin are morally superior to members of another race, 
    color, sex, or national origin.

      (B) An individual, by virtue of his or her race, 
    color, sex, or national origin, is inherently racist, 
    sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or 
    unconsciously.

      (C) An individual's moral character or status as 
    either privileged or oppressed is necessarily 
    determined by his or her race, color, sex, or national 
    origin.

      (D) Members of one race, color, sex, or national 
    origin cannot and should not attempt to treat others 
    without respect to race, color, sex, or national 
    origin.

      (E) An individual, by virtue of his or her race, 
    color, sex, or national origin, bears responsibility 
    for, or should be discriminated against or receive 
    adverse treatment because of, actions committed in the 
    past by other members of the same race, color, sex, or 
    national origin.

      (F) An individual, by virtue of his or her race, 
    color, sex, or national origin, should be discriminated 
    against or receive adverse treatment to achieve 
    diversity, equity, or inclusion.

      (G) An individual should feel discomfort, guilt, 
    anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on 
    account of his or her race, color, sex, or national 
    origin.

      (H) Such virtues as merit, excellence, hard work, 
    fairness, neutrality, objectivity, and racial 
    colorblindness are racist or sexist, or were created by 
    members of a particular race, color, sex, or national 
    origin to oppress members of another race, color, sex, 
    or national origin.

(5) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as compelling any individual to believe or refrain from believing in any politically-based concept referred to in paragraph (4) in their private and personal capacity.‘’.

                          ----------

This is the equivalent of suspecting one of two books to be containing Nazi propaganda because it has more pages in it.

I’m not saying you should not be suspicious of the content of Threads but using size as a metric for it seems nonsensical to a software dev.

The user interface in my opinion is pretty bad. It looks like old reddit which wasn’t that good. I have to manually expand each post to view it instead of just scrolling through.

Kbin is mostly better. But still a little rough on a few points.

Reddit in desktop mode is better.

Sync in card view mode was the best. Still looking for that experience.