Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ElonJet Is Now Suspended

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 1001 posts

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#701

Post by Eisenstein »

freedomben wrote: post #682
jimbob45 wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're going to mislead a lot of non-Americans here with the bit about political donations. In America, you can donate to one party to benefit the other party by virtue of candidate selection during primary elections. Who one donates to does not necessarily match their preferred party.

Yes that happens, but how common is it really? I've never heard of anyone actually doing that.

How many major campaign donors do you know? Is your anecdotal knowledge particularly meaningful in this context?

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#702

Post by reaperducer »

freedomben wrote: post #682
jimbob45 wrote: post #651

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're going to mislead a lot of non-Americans here with the bit about political donations. In America, you can donate to one party to benefit the other party by virtue of candidate selection during primary elections. Who one donates to does not necessarily match their preferred party.

Yes that happens, but how common is it really? I've never heard of anyone actually doing that.

Yes that happens, but how common is it really? I've never heard of anyone actually doing that.

It's becoming more common. I wouldn't say it's fully "common" yet.

I think the most public example was the recent gubernatorial election in Illinois. Incumbent Governor Pritzker donated money to a very far-right candidate, Darrin Baley, so that he would get the Republican nomination, and push moderate voters toward Pritzker in the general election.

It was all very well documented in Illinois newspapers during the election, and the New York Times did at least one piece about it, too.

The Times also noted that after the election, Biden gave a speech where he made a statement that this was not an acceptable practice. He didn't call out Pritzker by name, but if you were following the Illinois election, you know who he was talking about.

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#703

Post by stephc_int13 »

cyberlurker wrote: post #551
stephc_int13 wrote: post #243

A lot of people have been naïve about Elon Musk, especially Lex Fridman and Joe Rogan. Elon is not in the Ponzi business like SBF, but we've seen quite a few questionable statements and borderline vaporware predictions. More rational scrutiny and skepticism is needed, as a general rule, for anyone in power.

I want to hear Lex Fridman say if he has changed his opinion or not on Elon. I am not sure about Lex. He gives a platform to people who are disingenuous and then doesn't question them hard enough. Another person who defends Elon is Bill Maher. I am curious what he will say in the new year. Also MKBHD.

I still give Lex some credits but I am also suspicious.

I think he proved more than once that he is far from an expert on AI/Robotics, and that he tends to be naïve/gullible with his hosts.

The hosts themselves are often interesting and the whole setup/duration is nice enough. I don't mind too much about the host being half-smart.

Except when he is a simp of Elon his clique. Makes me sad.

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#704

Post by khuey »

dweekly wrote: post #654
madeofpalk wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is flightradar24.com a security concern? Note that the account wasn't about the location of a specific person, but rather the (public) location of a specific aircraft (own/used by a specific person). It's not like someone was tailing Elon and reporting their every location - planes must broadcast their location through use of ADS-B. It is public information. > If you agree its fine, would you apply the same reasoning…

Note that the FAA offers aircraft operators ways to make ADS-B information more private by vending a temporary ID for domestic flights. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/privacy Note also that FlightRadar24 and other ADS-B vendors are required by law to comply with FAA LADD, so airplane operators can request (demand, really) their information be scrubbed. https://nbaa.org/aircraft-operations/securi…

> Note also that FlightRadar24 and other ADS-B vendors are required by law to comply with FAA LADD

Flight tracking vendors that use FAA data are required by law to comply with LADD. Ones that run their own ADS-B networks and use no FAA data (e.g. ADSBexchange.com) are not.

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#705

Post by spritefs »

threeseed wrote: post #679
spritefs wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I agree that Elon is full of shit, but there's a little lie in here that needs to be addressed: > normal company operation in good faith But it wasn't "normal company operation" because they completely disregarded preexisting company policy for dealing with political figures. Here are political figures that they didn't ban (who were inciting violence) > 20. In June 2018, Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tweeted, “#…

> because they completely disregarded preexisting company policy for dealing with political figures That was the company policy. Public figures were largely exempt from the rules except when their tweet was egregious. Not sure why you think this is some conspiracy when it was blatantly obvious.

> Public figures were largely exempt from the rules except when their tweet was egregious.

So are you saying that the two tweets I posted above aren't egregious?

> Not sure why you think this is some conspiracy when it was blatantly obvious.

I can't find that allegation anywhere in my comment. What was there was the obvious inconsistency between not banning e.g. the Ayatollah for the above comment, but banning the former president

Can you find any tweets from the former president that were even comparable to the two tweets I posted?

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#706

Post by LordDragonfang »

m_fayer wrote: post #409
CommieBobDole wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Musk's behavior (and the behavior of a lot of public figures, really) makes more sense if you assume that he's not saying things to express ideas, but instead regards words as noises that you make with your mouth that cause other people to do or think things; if they stop having the intended effect, you have to change the noises. It's not hypocrisy, it's the natural outgrowth of seeing other people as a colle…

This is not far from how spectrum-y people see others unless they're motivated to overcome their deficiencies. I don't think that's a coincidence.

It's how many allistics see people, ASD folks just tend to be more self-aware about how social interaction works at a macro level (out of necessity).

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#707

Post by smoldesu »

P5fRxh5kUvp2th wrote: post #697
smoldesu wrote: post #681

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The larger problem isn't the lack of uniform enforcement. Our actual problem was trusting Twitter to remain impartial in the first place. It's crazy how many people bought into the "global town hall" bullshit Elon Musk pedaled, and now it's unsurprising to watch him backpedal now that the reigns are in his hands. Hopefully people realize that trusting $COMPANY will never deliver you anything good. We either regulate…

This is why we need regulation surrounding these things. It's a balancing act between individual and social rights (individual in this case being twitter), but these companies very explicitly build to scale to be a sort of "town hall" and in doing so start having very large social influence the likes of which no one in history has ever had. When they get to this scale there has to be extra responsibility here for the…

Well, yes and no. Yes, we need regulation if we want to hold people accountable for what they say online. No, in the sense that discriminating between large and small services is a bad idea. Scale has nothing to do with it, smaller services don't deserve to get off scott-free just because they didn't hit 'Twitter-scale' yet.

Again, the biggest issue here is the public misconception that Twitter (or any of the internet) is a benevolent platform. Legislation cannot change that.

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#708

Post by psychoslave »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #270
marricks wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are acting like Musk changed course for no reason I'm not sure that's the case. I think many people, myself included, assumed Musk's course was always "just do what's best for me." So he's really just holding to that. You should give people in your life the benefit of the doubt, but large corporations and billionaires usually found success by acting in their own interest so they will just keep on doing that.

> large corporations and billionaires usually found success by acting in their own interest so they will just keep on doing that I mean, if you have to irrationally hate someone, I guess billionaires are going to be the ones with the resources to handle it, but I'd really rather we as a society move away from this sort of cathartic scapegoating altogether. The more we normalize taking our anger out on some group or a…

>I mean, if you have to irrationally hate someone, I guess billionaires are going to be the ones with the resources to handle it,

I wonder, what could be a rational hate?

Personally I also wonder what is the supposed rationality behind any society granting some becoming billionaires. All the more when there is no social enforcement loop that ensure that the gap between richest and poorest remain in decent state. Otherwise the hate of the richest is an obvious outcome of the inequity structure.

Re: ElonJet Is Now Suspended

#710

Post by PathOfEclipse »

electrondood wrote: post #470

I understand this move, but need to point out how hypocritical this is for Mr. Free Speech. Basically, his entire tenure so far has been "free speech for me and the accounts that were rightfully banned for violating the TOS!" in public, and then "we'll deboost anyone who doesn't pay me a subscription" and "let's selectively release internal comms in a misleading way to make normal company operation in good faith seem…

> I understand this move, but need to point out how hypocritical this is for Mr. Free Speech.

Where's the hypocrisy? Musk said he wanted to broaden the speech allowed on the platform, not allow speech of all kinds.

> "let's selectively release internal comms in a misleading way to make normal company operation in good faith seem like a liberal conspiracy."

Maybe try getting your info from a non-leftwing source. There has been plenty of damning info coming from these internal comms.

Post reply on HN