651–660 of 790 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No
AWS got $10 billion from the NSA last year. Do you really think Bezos' Washington Post is going to be publishing anything that might derail contracts of that value?
Only thing that should really matter to NSA in regards to using AWS is, does AWS offer the products they need, at the price they want to pay.
Ah damn, I hoped for a fair experiment to demonstrate absordity of total free speech, but istead we got bog standard hypocracy! Boo! If you are caught wondering why some people still support Elon - in 'true conservative' society, like Russia or Saudi states, hypocracy is means of demonstrating hierarchy. So as a leader, you show that you are dominant by demonstrating that rules don't apply to you. That makes you even…
This is always how it goes. Free speech absolutists that run web communities basically always stop short the moment they feel like they are under threat (regardless of any actual threat). Even the most infamous of free speech platforms will just ban users who hurt the admins feelings. Back when Gab switched over to using a hostile fork of Mastodon for a backend[0], Torba banned the users of FreeSpeechExtremist (a Ple…
That's what pretty much everybody is doing at this point.
Elon's critics rightly point out the problems with his arbitrary rule by fiat, but who among his critics are proposing anything more principled than his behavior? By and large, people are calling him a hypocrite without articulating any more principled vision for how social media platforms should be run.
> You don't get this anger when the rules include in a clearly written way: "if I don't like what you're doing, for any reason, you're out" (also known as the escape hatch clause).
This sounds like basically codifying the current Elon Musk mode of governance. Are you really suggesting that the Internet would be better if every social media site was operated in this way, as long as it is explicit in the rules?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Please don’t just move to another centralized platform. Do you believe that all centralized platforms are inherently evil?
Well, they’re particularly vulnerable to the current twitter failure mode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The policy says comments like, "follow me @ on Instagram" are explicitly forbidden. One could very easily argue linking to ones own Facebook post could fall afoul.
There is a whole section on how cross posting is permitted: https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/social-platfo... > What is not a violation of this policy? > We recognize that certain social media platforms provide alternative experiences to Twitter, and allow users to post content to Twitter from these platforms. In general, any type of cross-posting to our platform is not in violation of this policy, even…
The policy is...not at all clear. I don't know what they mean by posting content "from" a prohibited site. They don't specifically mention a link.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AWS got $10 billion from the NSA last year. Do you really think Bezos' Washington Post is going to be publishing anything that might derail contracts of that value?
Why would NSA stop using AWS just because WaPo wrote something about NSA? It doesn’t make sense, really. Only thing that should really matter to NSA in regards to using AWS is, does AWS offer the products they need, at the price they want to pay.
> "Amazon today elected Keith Alexander, a retired four-star general of the U.S. Army, as it newest board director. Alexander was previously director of the National Security Agency and chief of the Central Security Service from 2005 to 2014. (Sep 9, 2020)"
Just a coincidence, nothing to see here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Free while there are alternatives. After they asfixiated the competition they're free to jack up the prices. Smart business practice really.
Right because it’s really hard for someone to set up a git server somewhere and change the origin.
Note that Mastodon is third in the list. I consider that a success. 1. They ignore you. 2. They laugh at you. 3. They fight you. <<<--- we are here. 4. You win.
Twitter's creditors must be just foaming at the mouth right now. Their investment is just cratering in value.
It was always a battle just to keep the lights on. I'm sure they're just glad it didn't collapse under their watch.
(from another thread) Any attorneys want to weigh in on whether - or when - this becomes an anti-competitive/anti-trust concern, either in the US (FTC) or the EU? Related reading: * Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) Article 102, on abusive conduct by companies that have a dominant position in a market: https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/antitrust/procedures... . Any EU resident can file a co…
I don’t see how this is a legal problem for Twitter, at least in the U.S. They are not a dominant force on the Web or even in social media; they have little market power. And any data that shows lots of people leaving for other social media platforms would actually help prove that competition is strong (ironically). Free speech cuts both ways. It’s legal for Twitter to block links to Mastodon for the same reason it w…