ZenRockGarden
Active Member
Yeah, but remember all those humans Elon fired? A lot of them were moderating this kind of stuff
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon & Twitter
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, but remember all those humans Elon fired? A lot of them were moderating this kind of stuff
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
Omg I’m so excited about what Elon is going to do with Twitter! It’s probably going to be turned into my most used app. The best part is he’s going to prove all these critics wrong yet again. Let’s look back on this thread a few years from now and see what people were saying. That’s going to be fun.
Guess Elon gave George Hotz the source code to twitter and now he's just messing around to see how twitter works live....cause why not.
ZenRockGarden
Active Member
Honestly curious - what do you think Elon will do with Twitter that will make it your most used app? Were you horribly restrained by Twitters former moderation policies and are now freed to.... um.... I dunno?
Spacep0d
Active Member
Do you understand why courts exist?
Defamation is a thing. Did you already forget the point about real-world Eli Lilly stock taking a dive because someone impersonating this 'official' account announced free insulin? What if this happened to TSLA and your investment? FUD is bad enough without people impersonating companies to ruin them, even as 'PaRoDy'. What if someone deep-faked you saying the most awful, reputation-destroying things? Still okay with it? What if it happened to your company or someone in your family? Sometimes the behavior is ahead of the legality, or the law hasn't caught up to the ethics. If you based your ethics on law alone you could still be an intensely unethical person. Have you never lived in an HOA or had someone pester you with frivolous lawsuits?
Your 'letter of the law' arguments make me wonder about your ethical standards. Impersonating people on Twitter when it's obviously malicious is not okay, and it can be far worse than a 'joke'. I also think you probably hold clear double standards here. What if this impersonation puts Trump in for 2024? Okay with it then?
Courts exist because people will disagree about the letter AND spirit of the law. You just try impersonating a company, killing their stock price based on impersonation, and see how that works out for you. You may think it's explicitly legal but that doesn't mean it's ethical, but it may not even be legal if someone decides to consume your time, energy, and money with a protracted lawsuit.
Spacep0d
Active Member
You're not being honest.
"I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law." -Elon Musk. You quoted him, remember? Do you not understand the First Amendment? There's no such thing as Free Speech Absolutism EVEN UNDER THE LAW. Elon uses laws AND facts as a starting point. Remember this going forward. Legacy Twitter didn't even do that. They used their Leftist/feminist/woke narrative as a standard even though it's not illegal to be conservative, not a feminist, non-woke, etc. So, Elon has *already* improved Twitter by simply bringing leadership (his) back to the center.
Show me how this is 'free speech absolutism'. How's your reading comprehension?
Spacep0d
Active Member
You're being incredibly dishonest, but sure, have fun with your strawmen. These tactics are the usual fare from the Left. Maybe you can team up with Gordo to be a professional FUDster, lol. You seem impervious to facts or reason. The sad thing is that you're probably not being paid to be wrong.
Spacep0d
Active Member
To be a conservative? To have a different opinion about feminist ideology? BLM? Antifa? Trans women in women's sport? To not march in lockstep with Marxists? To disagree with any trending ideology or narrative? To disagree that impersonating someone is A-OK? To EXPRESS YOUR CONSCIENCE HONESTLY?
You make this too easy.
Last edited:
Spacep0d
Active Member
This is parody. This isn't illegal.
Understand?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND?
Intentionally misquoting someone is unethical, though the legality can be a gray area where there's plausible deniability. Impersonating someone in order to harm their reputation is wrong, even if smart people can see through the ruse. Why do you think phishing and various scams work? Why do people pay pet 'psychics'? Just because smart people might catch the ruse doesn't change the fact that the ruse is unethical, and often illegal as well.
Is it wrong to make your newborn vegan even if it hurts their cognitive and motor development? Nope. Not illegal, but scientifically it WILL harm (or kill) the child. It's illegal in a few states, but that has no bearing on whether it's actually harmful given the overwhelming scientific consensus.
Is it illegal to be an anti-vaxxer? Depends on the area. Are you okay with this even if it's 'legal'? How about spreading anti-vaxx nonsense (a la Jenny McCarthy) and creating a viral (pun fully-intended) disinformation campaign?
Would you have supported miscegenation laws before the landmark Loving v. Virginia case in 1967? I hope not. The law often lags behind ethical standards, often dismally so. Slavery was legal at one time. Didn't make it ethical. Segregation used to be legal. Still unethical. Child-labor was legal at one time. Didn't make it ethical. Coca-Cola put friggin' Cocaine in their drinks early on. Didn't make it right because it was legal, and sometimes the fact that something is illegal doesn't make it wrong. Prohibition. Unfair anti-drug laws. Illegal marijuana, many restrictive morality laws, etc.
Prostitution is illegal in most places, but divorce ruins people much more thoroughly. At least prostitution is honest, but it's mostly illegal. Yet, if you buy a woman a cheap dinner and she gives herself to you for free, that's legal. George Carlin has a whole bit on this. Basically it boils down to, "Selling is legal. F*cking is legal. Why isn't selling f*cking legal?" He's got a point. Legality is a bad angle when you're trying to be so literal, but for speech it's a good starting point as well as whether that which is being said is actually true. Impersonating another user or company to cause mayhem/chaos/harm (wittingly or not) violates the 'Is it true?' test.
Don't forget that lots of people aren't smart or observant and some just want to confirm what they already think without nuance or fact-checking. Remember the dopey reporters who breathlessly reported on Ligma/Johnson losing their Twitter jobs?
Don't be one of those people who need to be PERSONALLY affected by bad actors to finally 'get it', like homophobic people who blasted out hate until someone in their family came up gay. Understand how impersonation can hurt you too, or people who think like you, or whether your candidate will win the presidency in 2024.
Isn't FUD dangerous because it's built on twisted nugget of truth, taken out of context or dishonestly amplified to be sufficiently believable and sensational for people who don't know better? There's a reason why it works, and it's not because the masses are so astute. Spreading FUD about people via impersonation is unethical, just like misquoting someone.
You are spreading FUD about someone spearheading Tesla, a company in which you are presumably invested, thinking you're scoring points of some kind. All you're doing is contributing to the firestorm of hate that's already out there for Elon and for what, to prevent a conservative from being too candid on the world's 'town square'? Remember, tolerance is a good thing, and that must include diversity of viewpoint, 'ZenRockGarden'.
The name unfortunately does not check out.
Last edited:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Except nobody was taken to court over that.
Also because it wasn't actually what hurt the stock- this was already debunked a while ago. Did you miss it? Here it is again:
Some folks are pointing out the twitter distraction IS causing this to their TSLA investment, based both on Elon dumping a ton of stock, and wasting a ton of time and goodwill on the whole thing
Eh, I'm not sure "Yet Another Crypto Thing Turns Out To Be Ponzi Scheme" is really the cracking journalism some suggest.
I mean, some folks are reporting some hilarious and interesting details about this SPECIFIC ponzi as points of interest, but anybody who finds the fact it WAS one news should be embarrassed
They didn't collapse because of some posts on twitter, they collapsed because they misappropriated like 8 billion actual-real dollars in customer funds and left nothing behind but a pile of magic beans.
Also since you like Omar as a source, he appears to not think the war on bots is going well
Do you?
unethical != illegal.
Elon Musk said:
But scams ARE illegal.
It's weird you keep not understanding the difference.
(there's also a difference between criminal and civil law you seem to be missing, which is a whole other discussion)
But point being- impersonating someone as commentary or criticism (OR comedy- but comedy is not required) is explicitly legal. LOTS of the people with fake accounts and blue checkmarks were doing so as COMMENTARY OR CRITICISM of twitter. Which is legal 1000% legal.
Impersonating someone to illegally obtain money is not.
It's not the impersonating part that breaks the law, it's what you're trying to do by doing it that might be.
Last edited:
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
A little tidbit (haven't started watching this), but that's a nearly 2h long video, on Twitter itself. Just a week ago that wasn't possible, if memory serves me correctly.
EDIT - featureset needs appropriately adjusted. Things like 2X playback, etc. that are present in Youtube would be nice.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
That would be impressive, considering it's not a publicly traded company.
scanning through the video, it wants to become a bank like thing…
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
The stock price did not budge significantly in response to that Tweet, for the record. (Check the Tweet time on Thursday.) As I recall, the price only declined notably on Friday. Events are reflected more or less instantly in the stock price (though the full impact may take time to develop).
Corrections welcome with data.
- Status
