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

Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 855 posts

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#601

Post by kshri24 »

latexr wrote: post #594
kshri24 wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You mean like Musk does. "while Musk is a proponent of free speech, he believes that moderation on Twitter should ‘hew close to the laws of countries in which Twitter operates" India has laws on content moderation, so does China, Turkey and other countries listed in the article. What Law in Brazil did X break? Or was it the whims and fancies of the Judge? Quoting from X post below [1]: “When we attempted to defend…

You keep saying “we”. Do you work for X, formerly Twitter? If not, who exactly are you? If you’re in any way related to the case or the companies or governments involved, there’s a major conflict of interest in this conversation and your defences. It’s good form to disclose those so that potential biases can be properly taken into consideration.

Huh? I said: "Quoting from X post below" and I literally quoted the X post. WTF are you talking about?

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#602

Post by itsoktocry »

viraptor wrote: post #317
dgfitz wrote: post #74

Disclaimer: indifferent at best to musk, probably more dislike than anything else, but not with vitriol. So I read that this is all because musk refused to appoint a Brazilian citizen as an X representative, as dictated by Brazilian law. I have not verified this part. Musk refused because the last person to fill that role had all their bank accounts frozen by the judge. The judge also cut off payments from Brazilian…

> well then starlink is free for Brazilian citizens because I don’t want to cut people off from their internet connection It's only for existing customers and because they can't charge them anymore, but don't want to drop the customers just yet. It's a business continuity plan, not some altruistic gesture.

>It's a business continuity plan, not some altruistic gesture.

What a goofy assertion.

Yeah, the big concern for Starlink and Musk is maintaining non-paying customers.

It's not altruism either, it's political.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#604

Post by kshri24 »

the_why_of_y wrote: post #558
kshri24 wrote: post #536

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Firstly, Twitter took that down because it violated their long standing policy against doxxing/posting hacked materials, not for any political reason. That was a BS reason chosen by Twitter. Twitter Files exposed that already. You are late. > Secondly, Twitter leadership realized very quickly that their policy wasn't really designed for this specific event, and within a day they changed the policy and unblocked the…

> Yeah you clearly haven't read the Twitter Files. It shows. Oh, the Twitter Files! Oh my, how I haven't read anything related to the Twitter Files! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a597e6Wv_xg https://www.techdirt.com/2023/04/07/mehdi-hasan-dismantles-t... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/04/10/after-matt-taibbi-leaves... https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-tru... https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/12/…

So your reply is to spam a bunch of links from Google Search. Cool!

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#605

Post by itsoktocry »

wkat4242 wrote: post #395
kstenerud wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's partisan/political because Musk is partisan/political. And it's not just Musk. We've been living in a fantasy land of "no political affiliation" in the tech world for decades, and now that the age of the hyper-rich has come once again, they are realizing the benefits of using the power they wield to shape the worlds they live in. So now in the early stages of this century's great fight, we'll see our beloved tec…

To be honest with the current polarisation levels in politics it's no longer possible to be neutral. The conservative side is now even strongarming companies into abandoning their diversity programs! This is just really not ok, I'm part of the LGBTIQ+ support network in our company and this kind of thing is really making waves. People are worried, even though we're a Europe based company where this is not a contested…

>The conservative side is now even strongarming companies into abandoning their diversity programs! This is just really not ok, I'm part of the LGBTIQ+ support network in our company and this kind of thing is really making waves.

Sorry pal, you're going to have to make it on merits, not your gender or skin color.

>See what happened to Ford, Jack Daniels, Harley Davidson, and many others. Decades of progress are being thrown out the window.

Racial quotas in the workplace is not progress.

>At least I now know which to boycott..

Oh, so your boycotts are fine? Classic leftist hypocrisy.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#606

Post by someguydave »

XorNot wrote: post #554
torginus wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really effing hate the idea that competition is created not because people with entrepreneurial spirit think they can do what SpaceX does cheaper and better, but because the guy running the show is politically undesirable and untrustworthy.

But that's not the issue: the issue is that Musk alienated almost the entire core demographic who wanted to buy Tesla's, wanted to support electric cars and were more or less completely primed to freely promote the entire brand. He is a man who owns an electric car company but has been pushing climate change denialism as his political position and supporting politicians who do. There's competition because Tesla is no…

how many other products do you ideologically affiliate with?

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#607

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

yokoprime wrote: post #508
Adrian_Ferreira wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

72% of Brazilians do not agree with the banning of X: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UleMSw8m3o

This is an excellent example of how statistics can be manipulated. Of course people don’t want to ban a service they use, but if the question had been “is it ok for foreign companies offering services to Brazilian citizens to ignore Brazilian law” the result would probably be different

And it would further be a different result if the question was:

"Is it ok for foreign companies offering services to Brazilian citizens to ignore Brazilian law? Even if that company is Twitter and it means you lose access to Twitter?"

The average person does not really care about what's right or wrong or fair - just what's in their interest.

The average person cannot or does not think - "But what if a bunch of other companies were doing this thing? What if we had to treat them all fairly?"

That's why it's good when you have a legal system that at least attempts to be fair - instead of just populist and doing whatever people want.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#608

Post by VancouverMan »

bobbruno wrote: post #497
open4glabs wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, I'm Brazilian and this is "censorship at all"!

Also brazilian here. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from the consequences of illegal speech. One is allowed to go public and speak their minds, but if their speech is illegal (hate speech, conspiracy to overthrow the government, political campaigning during embargo periods), there will be consequences for those, and that does not constitute censorship. Initially, consequences were not that bad (take down of…

"Freedom of speech" can't coexist with "illegal speech".

The moment that something is deemed "illegal" to express, there inherently is no more free expression present.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#609

Post by idunnoman1222 »

kstenerud wrote: post #474
mikrotikker wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech is all that matters. Musk is not perfect by any means here but he is better than the rest. He is exporting the 1st amendment to us nations who don't get to experience such freedoms. Which is what Twitter should have been doing, instead of kowtowing to the likes of the German and Saudi govts among others...

Free speech is a dog whistle. We can't have actual "free speech" in the pure sense of the term (just like we can't have pure democracy) because it would erode public confidence and destroy our democratic nations in the process. And there are outside actors currently working hard to ensure that this happens, because they want a return to the old imperial world order (where powerful nations capture territory and expand…

Ah yes, free speech: the final death knoll of western democracy.
Post reply on HN