What is allowable, in your opinion, as free speech?
With the purchase of twitter, I guess we are soon going to see this tested, as one mans idea of free speech may or may not align with the constitution. Where do you think this will go. I'm truly uncertain if anyone can counter the spam bots, hate speech such as threatening the life of a politician you don't agree with, and so on. And is removing them censorship?
The First Amendment does not apply to Twitter, it is not the government.
I see no reason for anyone to complain about restrictions of free speech on twitter, as it (free speech, not twitter!) has just been removed from schools in many states. Personally, if twitter does not keep some sort of rules against hate speech and outright lies meant to inflame, I'd just as soon see IT banned, along with any totally unregulated social media. I have not that power, and it's just as well - I'm quite aware I could easily become a tyrant (for all the best causes, of course...)
I doubt very much that Twitter will become an 'anything goes' outlet, I suspect it will just become more balanced. It's been interesting these past few days seeing journalists decry the concept of free speech, it's all very Orwellian.
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
It is the old freedom of the press argument. Freedom of the press, as long as you own the press.Originally Posted by Alan
I wish him luck as opening up the algorithms, probably means new algorithms, to avoid any software patent issues.
I would be interested in actually seeing a full listing of what causes banning, as well as shadow banning, etc. It seemed like civil asset forfeiture, where one has to prove innocence, rather then guilt having to be proved.
Radio was saying Bezos was making some musk/media comments, while talking about how he owns the Washington post.
A relative sent me this, which I laughed at:
MuskBezos.jpg
Noone loves that Bezo's owns the Washington Post (most of the time if referring to it I don't even call it that, I call it Bezo's publication etc.). It's bad, more bad stuff isn't going to make things better. But the Washington Post is so heavily paywalled, that who gets past the paywall even.
Trees don't grow on money
Musk has said he will reveal the algorithms to help stop spam bots.
I am very happy he has bought Twitter, and everyone I follow on Twitter is also.
A lot of the criticisms of him are invalid. For example, he is not a white supremacist. He left South Africa rather than be conscripted into an army enforcing apartheid. I also know other white South African emigres, including one in an interracial marriage, and none of them are racist. To paint them all is bigots is itself racist.
I think some people don't get Musk because he's autistic, and interested in ideas rather than accumulating wealth. (He does not have a house and sleeps at friends'.) For others the opposition is political.
A few billionaires owning everything is really not great. Elon Musk is like Trump a cult of personality. So the Elon Musk fan club is a cult really, it's *very* cult-like.
Trees don't grow on money
Having the Saudis own Twitter before was so much better, because they're not quite as rich.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote