61–70 of 373 posts
Yann Lecun is also telling everyone on Twitter very loudly that he won't be posting on Twitter. The Guardian in another article explains that they are annoyed because Musk used twitter to promote his preferred candidate. The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris. This deja-vu of childish antics is just comical in 2024
Real reason: The Guardian can't handle when readers community note them using.. The Guardian. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1821189070401249385/p...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Maybe I'm out of the loop here, where did the Guardian try to undermine the free flow of information? "given the often disturbing content promoted or found on the platform, including far-right conspiracy theories and racism" Disturbing to who? far-right compared to what point of reference? Which theories are conspiracy and which are legit? What is the definition of racism , who are racist people and why is it a bad…
That is them stating their opinion. That is not them "undermining the free flow of information". > Discussion about any of the above points happen in a "free" environment in which all parties can express their views. You are free to discuss the article on twitter, or, as you are already doing, here. The Guardian isn't stopping you.
Also it appears their editorial board and "community" is not able to defend their political stances on a free playground.
>The Guardian isn't stopping you
I think they would have, if there was a technical way to do so. And it's not just about Guardian at this point.
The Guardian isn’t posting there because they get called out all the time on their bad and biased reporting. The notes feature has been a nightmare for them. Also their bias is apparent based on their own messaging when they ask for donations - and this move is just another action that falls under the same bias.
Musk has one of the highest community note rates on his tweets. Has not stopped him one bit.
I am wondering if the actual reason is the recent change in the terms of service: New terms of service that will take effect on 15 November specify that any lawsuits against X by users must be exclusively filed in the US district court for the northern district of Texas or state courts in Tarrant county, Texas.
Is this even something TOS can legally enforce?
But why haven't they posted on Mastodon in two years https://mstdn.social/@TheGuardian
Because Mastodon and the entire Fediverse is infested with the most rabid sort of users that even Twitter couldn't stomach and has turned a blind eye to this fact? I mean, there's a reason why they keep getting brought up over and over and people continually nope out of signing up over there. They've got a demographic problem, they refuse to acknowledge it, and it's killing growth. Why would any media outlet want to…
Presumably for the same reason they find the optics of X acceptable but what do I know.
[flagged]
Yann Lecun is also telling everyone on Twitter very loudly that he won't be posting on Twitter. The Guardian in another article explains that they are annoyed because Musk used twitter to promote his preferred candidate. The Guardian itself used their own platform to publicly endorse Harris. This deja-vu of childish antics is just comical in 2024
Is it "childish antics" for the Guardian to have their own political viewpoint? Musk can have a preferred candidate and political stance. And he can run Twitter accordingly. The Guardian can have a preferred candidate and political stance. And they can choose the platforms they use accordingly. It all seems perfectly reasonable to me.
When a journal is biased... it is biased.
Objectivism is one thing. Bias is another. Bias at the US elections shit is just another level.
Real reason: The Guardian can't handle when readers community note them using.. The Guardian. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1821189070401249385/p...