151–160 of 1001 posts
Twitters relevant policy: “Private information: You may not publish or post other people's private information (such as home phone number and address) without their express authorization and permission. We also prohibit threatening to expose private information or incentivizing others to do so. Learn more.” Now.. his fight information is technically “public” but in that same sense, phone numbers and street addresses…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I don't know why anyone thought Twitter would be a "bastion" of free speech. His history proves otherwise.
Hacker News fell for it, hook line and sinker. The number of people saying "give him a chance" and "he actually believes in free speech" dominated those who were like, "he'll probably just change who gets banned to be more in line with his personal beliefs."
Now, some subset of people will be for and against anything, so if you filter selectively HN supports any and ever narrative.
Well it seems like Elon is reneging on his previous commitment to free speech. - https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456
Serious question: Is there an alternative narrative here? People are acting like Musk changed course for no reason, but are there no real claims that the account perhaps had started to engage in other rule-breaking content? Note that I'm asking for an actual steelmanned argument for why there's no possible defense of Musk here, not why people have high priors to just assume there's no defense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please explain the noteworthy parts of a private entity giving political entities special treatment. I’ll take my answer off the line. Thanks.
The noteworthiests bits are government entities directing censorship of private speech. Yes, Twitter is a private platform. But is it legal for the government to aid them in their censorship effort? Suppose Twitter had a policy against religious speech. Would it be legal for the government to identify instances of religious speech on the platform and forward it on to Twitter moderators, knowing it will certainly be r…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's because they've largely proven to be uninteresting or unsurprising. The two big reveals early on were: - The Biden family tried to get what is effectively revenge porn taken down from Twitter before he was elected. - Twitter had labels for high-profile accounts like libsoftiktok that meant "don't ban this person without some higher-up approval" In both cases they were deliberately presented in a misleadi…
I think it's interesting that the senior leaders did not seem to have an internal non-partisan justification for quashing the Hunter Biden story, though that obviously lends evidence to prior suspicions. >In the second case (quite amusingly, tbh) Weiss suggested Twitter was suppressing libsoftiktok, when in fact it was deliberately treating the account with kid gloves - i.e. she got it completely backwards. I think y…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How exactly is he working toward free speech being a driving force? From what I can tell, he's just banning different people.
He's not, he was idealizing it. His rhetoric about free speech harkens back to the early/mid internet days. The internet today is not what it was 20 years ago when you could run a platform where rule #1 was "Free speech is absolute and guaranteed", and could actually fulfill that promise without consequence.
Well it seems like Elon is reneging on his previous commitment to free speech. - https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456
Serious question: Is there an alternative narrative here? People are acting like Musk changed course for no reason, but are there no real claims that the account perhaps had started to engage in other rule-breaking content? Note that I'm asking for an actual steelmanned argument for why there's no possible defense of Musk here, not why people have high priors to just assume there's no defense.
Well it seems like Elon is reneging on his previous commitment to free speech. - https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you have to ask yourself which of the following is more likely: 1. @elonjet suddenly started to engage in some extremist/TOS-breaking behaviour 2. Elon Musk changed his mind Given that #2 has happened a few times already, I think that's a pretty reasonable assumption.
Oh, so you can provide another example of Elon directly saying he would do X and then turning around and doing not-X a month or so later with no sort of intervening events that would justify an about-face? I can't think of any.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
His narrative being petty things like "my pronouns are impeach/Fauci", since that's definitely something to spend $44B for.
I believe that is only the tip of the iceberg, given anti-vax narrative and transphobia is endlessly repeated by those on the far/alt-right. I see the "Prosecute/Fauci" tweet as a signal towards his intended audience for what kind of place he wants Twitter to be.
Indeed. I saw it described as "he's raised the Batshit signal"