Elon & Twitter

[Daniel in SD]

Don’t get me wrong, it’s good that Elon has decided to have moderation on Twitter instead of free speech absolutism. However as a person with 100M+ followers he needs to consider that some people are making important life decisions based on his Tweets.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1592722215673696258

 

[STS-134]

Because the difference between STS–134 and STS-134 is to the casual observer right? There are a million unicode look-alikes for most names. There are invisible unicode characters and things like trailing underscores, double underscores or a hundred other ways impersonators fake being the original user.

Suggesting enforcing unique usernames is enough is stupid.

None of which is a legal or free speech issue unless there is fraud/exposure to civil or criminal liability/etc.

 

[Spacep0d]

No, originally Elon was very clear and explicit that his vision for Twitter was to make all speech free there except when against federal law.

When he got in there and started trying to make that happen, THATs when he found new religion and punted the topic to a not-yet-existent moderation panel while he hand bans posts that hurt his feelings.

The law doesn't allow for 'absolute' free speech, even for free-speech absolutists. Twitter doesn't need to conform in lockstep with Federal law, and as LegacyTwitter™ showed us, it can even censor what is true or rail against mundane opinions which differ from the Hivemind.

That said, it's very rich of you to compare Elon to a cult of personality or a religious figure when the Cult of Woke has been canceling heretics for years. Twitter was just one of their gathering places.

I'm an atheist and supporter of Elon so I find your comparison comical.

Impersonating someone wasn't done in jest or as simple parody by the bad actors who were doing this. It was an attempt to harm someone, just like the various hit pieces, the FUD, the personal attacks against Elon, the lies, half-truths, out of context 'facts', the wildly uncharitable interpretations amplified as FUD, etc.

We see all of the dirty tricks, and frankly every time I see people use these underhanded strategies I lose respect for them (and those like them) all the more. I'm running out of respect to lose, sadly.

No wonder Trump got elected. I didn't vote for him but this kind of vitriol is a great way to lose hearts and minds. It pays to be an honest interlocuter, even if one gets it wrong occasionally. Elon is at least honest, unlike most of his detractors.

 

[Spacep0d]

Yes, we’re all jealous of Elon, and there are really no grounds to criticize anything he’s done.
Not even sure why this thread was even necessary. Mods! Help! Can you delete it all?

Did you work for LegacyTwitter™ perchance? You want to unilaterally call for the destruction of this thread because of...why? Hurt feelings?

 

[STS-134]

Impersonating someone wasn't done in jest or as simple parody by the bad actors who were doing this. It was an attempt to harm someone

Actually it was not. Since all attempts to tell Elon how stupid his definition of free speech absolutism was failed, it was an attempt to show him how stupid it was. It appears to have worked although Elon still hasn't publicly taken back his definition of "free speech absolutism" or announced that he's no longer a free speech absolutist so...

 

[ZenRockGarden]

The law doesn't allow for 'absolute' free speech, even for free-speech absolutists. Twitter doesn't need to conform in lockstep with Federal law, and as LegacyTwitter™ showed us, it can even censor what is true or rail against mundane opinions which differ from the Hivemind.

That said, it's very rich of you to compare Elon to a cult of personality or a religious figure when the Cult of Woke has been canceling heretics for years. Twitter was just one of their gathering places.

I'm an atheist and supporter of Elon so I find your comparison comical.

Impersonating someone wasn't done in jest or as simple parody by the bad actors who were doing this. It was an attempt to harm someone, just like the various hit pieces, the FUD, the personal attacks against Elon, the lies, half-truths, out of context 'facts', the wildly uncharitable interpretations amplified as FUD, etc.

We see all of the dirty tricks, and frankly every time I see people use these underhanded strategies I lose respect for them (and those like them) all the more. I'm running out of respect to lose, sadly.

No wonder Trump got elected. I didn't vote for him but this kind of vitriol is a great way to lose hearts and minds. It pays to be an honest interlocuter, even if one gets it wrong occasionally. Elon is at least honest, unlike most of his detractors.

Forgive me for describing people who insist that their leader can literally do no wrong as religious-like, and for simply trying to apply their own principles that they themselves advanced to their own behavior (and finding it to not match).

I mean, if I was an evil bad "vitriol" person I might be posting about the president sucking his own p*nis - that'd be totally out of line (and oops guess who actually did exactly that?)

 

[Spacep0d]

Twitter and every other platform enforces a unique name for every account. Kathy's handle is @KathyGriffin and once it is registered, no other account can use it. Everyone on Twitter knows that handles are unique, that the handle shows up both in the URL *and* below the username, and that the username is NOT unique and can be changed to anything at any time. So if you are trying to find the identity of the posting account, you use the handle, not the username. And in any case, identity theft is a specific crime that requires using someone else's credentials to commit fraud. No fraud, no identity theft.

The problem you're struggling to understand is that you expect people to read finer print instead of the USERNAME IN BIG BOLD LETTERS. You're asking for a level of sophistication that is lost on people when they are angry or upset or triggered. Angry Leftists never use the level of nuance and sophistication they're demanding for those who impersonate others on Twitter.

Why on Earth do you think Eli Lilly's stock took a dive from the JUSTFINEPARODYNOTHINGWRONG impersonation of this account that announced free insulin?

Does doxxing fall under your comical 'absolute free speech' strawman that you've applied to Twitter? If not, why not? Is it not public information? Is it illegal?

I'm sure we could find LEGAL speech that is unethical if we think hard enough. It's also legal to be a moron, but there's a social cost to this (I'm not calling you a moron).

 

[Spacep0d]

Actually it was not. Since all attempts to tell Elon how stupid his definition of free speech absolutism was failed, it was an attempt to show him how stupid it was. It appears to have worked although Elon still hasn't publicly taken back his definition of "free speech absolutism" or announced that he's no longer a free speech absolutist so...

You're not being honest. Nobody said Twitter was supposed to be free speech absolutism. You keep knocking down strawmen of your own creation.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

You're not being honest. Nobody said Twitter was supposed to be free speech absolutism. You keep knocking down strawmen of your own creation.

Elon literally explained that freedom of all speech that was not explicitly illegal under federal law WAS his goal for Twitter. Where were you?

"I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask the government to pass laws to that effect"

"free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated.”

 

[Spacep0d]

Forgive me for describing people who insist that their leader can literally do no wrong as religious-like, and for simply trying to apply their own principles that they themselves advanced to their own behavior (and finding it to not match).

I mean, if I was an evil bad "vitriol" person I might be posting about the president sucking his own p*nis - that'd be totally out of line (and oops guess who actually did exactly that?)

Strawman Fallacy. Nobody said that Elon can do no wrong. If they did you would have a point, but they didn't and you don't.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Strawman Fallacy. Nobody said that Elon can do no wrong. If they did you would have a point, but they didn't and you don't.

Then why the endless claims that Elon didn't say and do exactly what we said he did, and that Twitter isn't the dumpster fire we said it would be?

We explain where huge mistakes have been made, and the response is the Elon is brilliant, he's made amazing cars and space ships and is doing the same with twitter (as it burns)

Demonstrate your claim: Tell us any major things Elon has done wrong at twitter.

 

[Spacep0d]

Elon literally explained that freedom of all speech that was not explicitly illegal under federal law WAS his goal for Twitter. Where were you?

"I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask the government to pass laws to that effect"

"free speech is the bedrock of a functioning democracy, and Twitter is the digital town square where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated.”

Read what you wrote. I haven't verified the quote but I'll assume it's true.

"I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law."

Do you see no wiggle room here? Do you not recall LegacyTwitter™? Legacy Twitter censored people WAY BEYOND THE LAW because they were censoring based on ideology, and sometimes they censored people repeating facts or simply having an opinion that was pretty mundane but which flew in the face of Leftist orthodoxy.

Not everything is cut and dried. Should opposite-sex hormones or hormone blockers be given to young self-identified 'trans' children under 18? If not, why not? If you had the wrong opinion on this on LegacyTwitter™, you could get shadowbanned, suspended, banned, canceled, or worse. This is a real topic which merits real debate based on science, yet emotions run high around issues like this. There's a scientific answer, there are ideological answers, but Twitter always had the thumb on the scale for (far) Left/Woke/Feminist ideology. This was a problem because it had a chilling-effect on FREE speech, and that's easy to fix once the ideological fence is removed.

Why was old Twitter like this? Ideology, and this came straight from the top. This is why one of Elon's first moves post-buy was to fire the cancer at the top. No matter what noises we make here, Twitter is more free now than it has been in years. That doesn't mean absolute free speech and using the law (and facts) as a guide is a very good start and a huge improvement.

And you want to talk about religious fervor. Woke ideology is religious in nature, which is why it favors ideology/narrative over facts. Why else do you think Elon felt compelled to spend 44B on Twitter? It wasn't just to do some administrative work with checkmarks or improve monetization. There were many reasons, but freeing the bird was paramount.

This Woke thing is not exclusive to Twitter. It's everywhere, even parodied on South Park. So, Twitter is as much as symptom as a 'cause'. There's a reason the Left is attacking him endlessly, like someone breaking into a hive of Murder Hornets. If you've been around a while you understand what FUD is.

How is the FUD against Elon (post Twitter buy) any different? It's not. These are dishonest actors, and you're fueling the fire (wittingly or not) because of your own political orientation.

 

[Spacep0d]

Then why the endless claims that Elon didn't say and do exactly what we said he did, and that Twitter isn't the dumpster fire we said it would be?

We explain where huge mistakes have been made, and the response is the Elon is brilliant, he's made amazing cars and space ships and is doing the same with twitter (as it burns)

You're crying next to the implosion site. Twitter is being rebuilt from the foundation. Just give it time.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Read what you wrote. I haven't verified the quote but I'll assume it's true.

"I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law."

Do you see no wiggle room here? Do you not recall LegacyTwitter™? Legacy Twitter censored people WAY BEYOND THE LAW because they were censoring based on ideology, and sometimes they censored people repeating facts or simply having an opinion that was pretty mundane but which flew in the face of Leftist orthodoxy.

And you want to talk about religious fervor. Woke ideology is religious in nature, which is why it favors ideology/narrative over facts. Why else do you think Elon felt compelled to spend 44B on Twitter? It wasn't just to do some administrative work with checkmarks or improve monetization. There were many reasons, but freeing the bird was paramount.

I see exactly what we've been saying: That Elon expressed his original goal in absolute legal terms. Free Speech of all kinds that's not explicitly illegal.

And how, he's banning things left and right simply because he didn't like them. Not one illegal item in there. Courts are firm that parody is allowed.

DEAL with it already.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

The law doesn't allow for 'absolute' free speech, even for free-speech absolutists. Twitter doesn't need to conform in lockstep with Federal law, and as LegacyTwitter™ showed us, it can even censor what is true or rail against mundane opinions which differ from the Hivemind.

That said, it's very rich of you to compare Elon to a cult of personality or a religious figure when the Cult of Woke has been canceling heretics for years. Twitter was just one of their gathering places.

I'm an atheist and supporter of Elon so I find your comparison comical.

Impersonating someone wasn't done in jest or as simple parody by the bad actors who were doing this. It was an attempt to harm someone, just like the various hit pieces, the FUD, the personal attacks against Elon, the lies, half-truths, out of context 'facts', the wildly uncharitable interpretations amplified as FUD, etc.

We see all of the dirty tricks, and frankly every time I see people use these underhanded strategies I lose respect for them (and those like them) all the more. I'm running out of respect to lose, sadly.

No wonder Trump got elected. I didn't vote for him but this kind of vitriol is a great way to lose hearts and minds. It pays to be an honest interlocuter, even if one gets it wrong occasionally. Elon is at least honest, unlike most of his detractors.

The impersonation was very, very clearly done to show how Elon Musk or his group had destroyed the value of the blue tick, showing how easily verified users could easily be impersonated.

When they said they were introducing a fee, I (and I'm sure others) assumed this included verification of identity, with the payment allowing verification to be faster. But, no, instead it was just plain dumb.

 

[STS-134]

You're not being honest. Nobody said Twitter was supposed to be free speech absolutism.

Oh yes someone did. The guy who now owns it.

 

[ZenRockGarden]

Oh yes someone did. The guy who now owns it.

It's comical. I supply direct quotes of Elon explaining his free speech absolutist plan for Twitter and they still deny it happened.

Then they get mad when I say they have an almost religious fervor for defending the guy, followed by claiming I'm being "vitriolic" for daring to calmly talk about it and call someone "skippy" as their dear leader hurls poop emojis and self-felatio attacks at various enemies.

 

[texas_star_TM3]

I think this is the only smart move he's made during this entire saga. I would bet that there are a huge number of employees who have already decided to leave and are sitting around updating their resumes and applying for other jobs. This gives them an incentive to leave. I have to wonder how many people will want to commit to startup culture without startup equity.
I feel bad for the H1B employees (who would need to find another sponsor in 60 days or leave the country).

apparently this email went out worldwide and ... just saying... in most European countries there is more than 3 months of severance and you can't get terminated by just "not responding" to a link or click to commit to something

 

[ZenRockGarden]

apparently this email went out worldwide and ... just saying... in most European countries there is more than 3 months of severance and you can't get terminated by just "not responding" to a link or click to commit to something

Elon seems to operate with a very US-centric mindset about Twitter - grounded by his original thrust to alter all of Twitter's moderation to address what he thought was unfair fact checking of certain US political figures which most of the world doesn't much care about.

And before team-you-just-hate-Elon gets their panties in a bunch - I LIKE Elon's work at Tesla, he's an amazing engineer, I just want him out of the social media dumptster fire so he can get back to what he's good at. OK?

 

[Ogre]

This whole thread gets more ridiculous by the day.

A couple days ago people were whining about how Blue Checks made it way too easy to impersonate users. Now (often the same people) the comment is about how impersonating is a fundamental part of free speech.

Oh yes someone did. The guy who now owns it.

Musk doesn’t include impersonating in free speech. That’s your nonsense invention.