I remain surprised at how casually people will step over the free speech dead body so they can hate on people the media at large has maligned. Regardless of what you think of Musk, where's your outrage over this blatant authoritarianism?
Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
211–220 of 855 posts
Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
> what they viewed as unconstitutional orders to censor speech. As in Brazil constitution? They don't have free speech, but freedom of expression. Read article 5 of the Brazilian constitution.
What’s the difference between Free Speech and Freedom of Expression?
Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#213Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does Bluesky intend to be responsive to the kind of court orders that X rejected?
Speaking entirely personally as I don't handle those questions at bsky. I couldn't even begin to comment without seeing knowing what the court orders were and what the cases are. Every social company operating internationally runs into this issue, and it's daunting to say the least. So, again, this is not something I decide. What I can say is that the protocol is a neutral global layer for data, which can then enable…
https://x.com/alexandrefiles/status/1829979981130416479?s=46...
Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#215It saddens me the Brasil banned X because of racism, anti-semitism and hate-speech. But X is still not banned in the west. At some point we have to come to this realization in the west that absolutism is never the answer. Free speech is good upto certain extent, the way it was at Twitter before the rich and powerful took over. Moreover, it is content moderation and it doesn't have anything to do with free speech.
Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#216Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#217Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
As far as I'm aware, the American government has never ordered a social media platform to ban certain accounts. Even mild government suggestions about social media content are quite controversial in the US.
[flagged]
Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bluesky team worked previously on IPFS and Dat/Hypercore and Secure Scuttlebutt. Whyrusleeping - one of the core authors of IPFS - has been an active technical advisor from the start. ATProto is basically those p2p & content addressed techs moved into the server stack. None of us are bullish on client side p2p for large scale publishing or social applications, and we spent 10 years each doing that.
P2P is hard, but that does not mean undesirable.
Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The lawsuit from his X platform against the non-profit advertising initiative GARM has led to its dissolution. A major ad industry group is shutting down, days after Elon Musk-owned X filed a lawsuit that claimed the group illegally conspired to boycott advertising on his platform." -- Google I.e. Musk did not sue the advertisers.
Yes he did: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txnd.39... Parties include the following. The last 5 are advertisers. - WORLD FEDERATION OF ADVERTISERS; - UNILEVER PLC - UNILEVER UNITED STATES, INC. - MARS, INCORPORATED - CVS HEALTH CORPORATION - ØRSTED A/S docket: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69017972/x-corp-v-world...
Do you think the Sherman Act is an unreasonable limitation on the free market?