111–120 of 207 posts
Sorry I don't get: how is possible to find anybody defending Musk when the Supreme Court of a democracy ruled to exclude X from the country ? Free speech is a good thing AS LONG AS it respect the country laws. In France, the People decided democratically (through their elected representatives) against some kinds of so-called "free speech" (for example: racism apology). That's OUR choice, on OUR territory (like it or…
Sorry I don't get: how is possible to find anybody defending Musk when the Supreme Court of a democracy ruled to exclude X from the country ? Free speech is a good thing AS LONG AS it respect the country laws. In France, the People decided democratically (through their elected representatives) against some kinds of so-called "free speech" (for example: racism apology). That's OUR choice, on OUR territory (like it or…
I am not in favor of any government fining people thousands of US dollars a day for the thoughtcrime of using a VPN to access X from within Brazil.
(I'm pretty sure that mods are hiding the VPN-ban news from /r/news and /r/worldnews, because it would damage the ongoing anti-Musk two-minute hates.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Australians already own those lithium mines. The largest here in Brazil is very close to my hometown.
Latin america have the world largest Lithium reserves, specially accross Argentina, Bolivia and Chile being the three largest and Brazil being the 7th.. The largest lithium mining company in the region is Sigma Lithium.. Tesla was negotiating to buy the Sigma Lithium but now the Chinese BYD is the favorite.. [0] [1] China companies are currently owning the EV market in Brazil , and many other developing contries, and…
Things in Brazil are not simple as that. Bolsonaro, the latest right wing president, did more business with china and russia than expected. He was one of the first chief of state to fly to Moscou when Russia invade Ukraine, to reinsure brazil would be neutral on this war. (same position of Lula).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess you would be on the barricades fighting for DDRs right to suppress free speech as well. I take whatever victories I can. I don't care about his motives, I'm sure they are nefarious or money related. But that doesn't matter. I don't care about his motivation I care about the results.
The result will be that speech will be suppressed for 99% of the population and only a select few can talk. If it was a principled position the effects would be 10 times greater but since he compromised himself for money, the effects would be minimal. I've thought about it more. I think the reason why he refused was because it was a public court order, so everyone could see him cooperate. If they did it like Erdoğan…
Yeah its harder to censor people out in the open. FB and Zuck hid it - but i believe he recently said he regretted doing that.
I dont see how hiding your motivation and allowing free speech is in fact anti-free-speech.
Why do you see it as an attack? You are arguing that brazil has the right to limit free speech and that Elon should comply and censor his platform. That is what they've done in many countries, DDR for example. Do you not agree?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No (I have no idea who he has banned or not) but that sounds like a powertrip!
Not just leftists, but also journalists critical of him: https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/x-journalist-ban-elon-mus... His so-called free-speech absolutism is a sham and he does not deserve the benefit of doubt on this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way does taking X off Brazil decrease the censorship in Brazil?
It certainly makes whatever censorship might be taking place less skewed by Musk's personal whims.
X is turning into a wasteland of angry people and bots. Bluesky is much more refreshing, similar to the old twitter.
{oldPlace} is bad. {newPlace} is better. An eternal cycle.
I'm partial to ATProto, especially when it comes to user choice for algos, moderation, data hosting, and UI. There have been a few good HN posts lately, and in particular the comments therein
Is this a principled defense of free speech or a case of a man treating ostensibly independent companies as divisions of his personal conglomerate?
Musk was happy to block Twitter content for Erdoğan before the 2023 Turkish election,[0][1] and block Ukraine from using it to hit the Russian navy.[2]
[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/05/musk-defends-ena...
[1] https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/05/twitter-musk-censors...
[2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/musk-stopped-ukraine-atta...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's one thing leading to the other. It is what it is. Are the judge's (possibly illegal) moves motivated by interpretation of the law or by personal vendetta? Hard to tell , but i'm glad for less censorship.
As the past two years of Twitter's evolution have shown, more power to Elon Musk actually leads to more censorship. He's running the social media service like a kingdom where lèse-majesté is the gravest offense, promoting himself and blocking any topics that he doesn't personally like (including the existence of his own daughter who posts on Threads now). Old Twitter had flawed content moderation processes, but at le…
TIL:
> Lèse-majesté or lese-majesty (UK: /ˌliːz ˈmædʒɪsti/ leez MAJ-ist-ee, US: /ˌleɪz -/ layz - )[1][2][3] is an offence or defamation against the dignity of a ruling head of state (traditionally a monarch but now more often a president) or of the state itself. The English name for this crime is a modernised borrowing from the medieval French, where the phrase meant 'a crime against the Crown'. In classical Latin, laesa māiestās meant 'hurt/violated majesty' or 'injured sovereignty' (originally with reference to the majesty of the sovereign people, in post-classical Latin also of the monarch).[2][3]