[flagged]
X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
451–460 of 834 posts
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#452Earlier quoted context omitted.
It certainly does not come as a shock to him. He knows what he is doing. The funny thing is if he was Russian he would be called an "oligarch" in every news piece. Since he's American he's an entrepreneur :)
Also how liberals were celebrating Elons "genius" just a decade ago will never not be funny to me, they also don't seem to mind Gates at all. I don't think they have much of a problem with oligarchy, they just want a liberal oligarchy instead.
Maybe news outlets were doing this but “liberals” at large were not.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#453Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
The "lane" is simple and has always been: no "right", as fundamental as it can be, is limitless. For ex. Freedom of movement is largely restricted, and the fact I can't "enter your house freely" is not a slippery slope to internal visas as the sort China uses to restrict movement internally. Even in the US, freedom of speech IS restricted: the Supreme Court put the bar very high but it didn't say you could say anythi…
If you violate an NDA, it is a civil matter. (Unless something significant has changed without me knowing!) That's completely separate from the government embarking on a criminal prosecution over speech. I think it is important to make the distinction.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#454Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here is my lane: Elon is a hypocrite. He bought twitter in the name of "free speech," then removes any speech he doesn't like. His actions are inconsistent, and this one of many demonstrations that he doesn't care at all about liberty. That matters because he's now apparently in charge of every federal government agency.
Musk is a hypocrite, but so too are progressives on the topic of freedom of speech. It's the pot calling the kettle black.
That's a generalization that I think you'll find hard to back up with evidence. I'm the progressive you're discussing this with right now, and I don't think I've said anything inconsistent. But I'll respond to your imagination's idea of what "progressives" must be saying anyway.
The statements "Elon Musk Musk doesn't care about free speech because he doesn't allow (edge case)." and "Free speech has limits." Are non-contradictory.
Additionally, not allowing links to Signal isn't an "edge case," but a considerable offense against free speech (the general concept, not the literal law in the constitution), especially for one who calls himself a "free speech absolutist."
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Freedom of speech" on Twitter is nothing more than Newspeak for censorship. In reality, the goal has always been to silence minorities who already struggle to express themselves, while allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant. It is a form of indirect censorship, through the self-censorship of minorities who fear speaking out. Then comes direct censorship, where certain terms or lin…
Just because some people use "freedom of speech" as a veil, doesn't make it bad.
True, but thanks to certain groups using it as a dog whistle you now have to do extra work to find out whether you the person saying it actually cares about empowering people to speak or whether they just want a safe space where they can say the n word.
Which thankfully when it's a platform it doesn't take long to find out which it is.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#456Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the tricky line, isn't it? Regardless of whether someone is entitled to free speech, is a private company bound to the constitutional protection? My understanding has always been that its specifically the government that can't censor me, a private company or citizen can. The NY Times isn't required to write an article I submit to them for example, that's no different than Twitter deciding not to keep a post a…
> My understanding has always been that its specifically the government that can't censor me, a private company or citizen can. Then you have no free speech. I can just refuse you internet access, or not sell ink and paper to you… So my take is that no, it should not be allowed to private companies to censor arbitrarily. And of course an "algorithm" that sorts stuff in any other way than chronologically is censorship…
Then you do not have free speech, since this is what the rules of free speech are.
They are about ensuring that the government doesnt use its unique powers of force to ensure that certain ideas are not shared or discussed.
What the current government is doing, with Fox + Twitter, is fundamentally the opposite of free speech. They have the power to say something, then pretend it is true, and act on it.
Its not a fair fight.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
If your sycophants eat everything you'll throw at them there won't be any need for justification. Which completely baffles me. The US digital technology sector seems to be full of yes man and groupthink, and it's getting worse.
There is plenty of criticism of Elon Musk coming coming from both sides of the political spectrum. I am consider myself right of centre and I hear plenty of criticisms of Elon Musk coming from the right. The complaints are completely different though. The big problem with any of these discussions (especially online) is that a lot of people are intellectually lazy and assume the other-side is comprised of brain dead z…
I don’t think it’s quite right to say they assume it. News outlets and online platforms intentionally cultivate that idea, because in the modern era they directly optimize for engagement, and I’m substantially more likely to click on people saying or complaining about outrageous things than measured criticisms from a perspective I don’t share.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#458Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Freedom of speech" on Twitter is nothing more than Newspeak for censorship. In reality, the goal has always been to silence minorities who already struggle to express themselves, while allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant. It is a form of indirect censorship, through the self-censorship of minorities who fear speaking out. Then comes direct censorship, where certain terms or lin…
Aren't racists a minority who struggle to express themselves? How did you come to these conclusions about the goals and future of Twitter? My naive expectation was that Musk is mostly interested in enriching and aggrandizing himself, and that a crusade against some social group is only interesting as long as it serves the primary interests.
That's true in good part. But when it comes to leftist activists specifically, it's war for Musk. His son transitioning didn't exactly endear him to the ideology.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#459[flagged]
I blocked twitter embeds on all my forums today. I'm so done with him.
Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links
#460Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Freedom of speech" on Twitter is nothing more than Newspeak for censorship. In reality, the goal has always been to silence minorities who already struggle to express themselves, while allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant. It is a form of indirect censorship, through the self-censorship of minorities who fear speaking out. Then comes direct censorship, where certain terms or lin…
Just because some people use "freedom of speech" as a veil, doesn't make it bad.
As with all things in life, regulation makes it possible in the first place.
Unfortunately, in American culture any kind of regulation is seen as negative inherently, whereas in continental European cultures, regulation is seen as a vital and fundamental part of ensuring a place where everyone can thrive.