Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Elon & Twitter

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.
230 does not protect publishers, it specifically gives immunity to web sites on the grounds they they are not publishers. Twitter was acting like a publisher when they suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story as well as posts on Covid, vaccines and the 2020 election (but not, for example, when they removed obscene pics of Hunter Biden as permitted by safe harbor clauses).

Becoming a publisher for some content does not mean you lose 230 protections for everything. But Democrat and Republican politicians are both talking about more broadly stripping 230 protections from Twitter and other social media sites. So we'll see how it goes.

Not a lawyer, but apparently rules against doxing, hate speech, misinformation and the like don't count as "selecting content" (or not so far).
And actually having such rules on a platform is protected by the freedom of speech laws.

My impression is that "selecting content" would be an act where each content posted is approved by the platform.
 
Last edited:
That is just your opinion, plenty of people with better credential disagree with you:



SPOT on. People don't like it, but this is a math problem, plain and simple.

The older generations are living longer, and the younger generations are not having as many kids. It is mathematically impossible for the younger generation to make enough $$$ and contribute it to any nationalized pension/retirement system without running massive deficits.

The United States also increased the age for Social Security Benefits from 65 to 67, and the decision was completely math based. France is literally decades behind in this decision.
 
Of course not, that's like saying each company's stock should tank the same percentage during a downturn, that's just stupid.
Well I think the point is it's just as stupid to say just because other companies are firing too, that it's the same thing as what was done at Twitter. I've made the point a billion times upthread, but Twitter would have fired people and downsized even if the sale didn't go through, due to the economic downturn. But the scale at which it would have been necessary would have been much, much less, and Twitter would have still been able to make a profit.

The impression that was trying to be pushed by Elon was that the company would have been a money loser without the sale and that Twitter was never profitable (I see a lot of people still think that). The reality is the drastic cuts (not only to staff, but also in terms of being late on rent and vendor bills) only became necessary because of the huge amount of debt loaded onto the company due to the sale, and the policies that scared off advertisers (forcing Twitter to offer huge discounts to get them to come back).
 
It appears that Elon is not distracted by his new toy
Europe is entirely driven by 95g quotas. I predicted years ago Euro EV sales would climb dramatically in 2020 and 2021, and Tesla would lose share. Then legacy EV sales would flatten in 2022 and 2023, opening the door for Tesla to regain some of that lost share. So far everything is going to script. The next big legacy ramp should start to kick in next year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.