Do you have proof they do? And you you believe before Elon that was not an issue?
Elon Musk | Owner of X
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
To be fair, I find a bit weird the outcry for Twitter allowing back the likes of Jordan Peterson etc, where the likes of Ayatollah Khamenei or Dmitry Medvedev are there. Though at the end of the day, Twitter (like Caf for example) is a private business and can allow there and ban whoever it wants.
As what I would prefer in general, I am against banning unless the person is a criminal, or other extreme cases. I would censor views that are illegal (e.g., denying Holocaust in Germany), but not views that some party does not like. Instead people should be able to regulate what they want to see by blocking whoever they want.
As what I would prefer in general, I am against banning unless the person is a criminal, or other extreme cases. I would censor views that are illegal (e.g., denying Holocaust in Germany), but not views that some party does not like. Instead people should be able to regulate what they want to see by blocking whoever they want.
I’m not playing any sort of knight here. I’m just explaining to you that Twitter has to abide by the laws of the territories it operates in. That’s completely agnostic of my own politics and opinions.
This is a bit naive, I think. There is no debate to be had about the holocaust. The only thing that legitimizing such a debate is going to lead to is more holocaust deniers.
Have any proof they do what?
Before Musk it was an issue too, one that they were constantly trying to manage. The problem is that since Musk, many of the offenders have been allowed back.
We’re only talking about the right wing offenders that have been allowed back because he’s only allowed back right wing offenders.
And yes, plenty of left wing activists were removed from the platform before Musk’s arrival.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections
Like a ban from the platform the person posted it on?
And what if its not a backlash because that online post only shows for people who agrees or are on the fence?
If they don't do that, what makes you think they won't be told off or fined?
Not about the Holocaust, but about people to deny them. And where do you spot them?
So you think if someone posts that Holocaust did not happen, everyone who reads the post will go: oh shit, I didn't know, but that seems about right? If someone wants to believe that nonsense, they do it anyhow. You dont need a tweet for that, as the roots for such believes come from the upbringing, surroundings, social classes, etc.
Surroundings now is very much Social Media.
You think social media hasnt impacted the spread of people believing in conspiracy theories? Surely you can comprehend that this can be more complex than someone reading it and at that moment deciding to believe it
They call it a rabbit hole for a reason. And confirmation bias works exceptionally well in conjunction with social media algorithms.
Ok you’re getting somewhere.
Now how can Twitter ensure that their users abide by these international laws and regulations?
Vaccine induced mind control software!
Mine updated last night, and I have to say the new version of PfizerMind has some nice features.
No, that's way too simplistic. But words matter, they actually do affect people. This is a bit like saying we should allow the Nazi Party and air official Nazi Party propaganda because "anyone who wants to believe that nonsense do it anyhow". It just doesn't work like that. History has shown again and again and again that if you give someone a platform, it broadens their appeal. When has honest, out-in-the-open debate ever done anything to stop an extreme position?
It doesn't hence it is forbidden
If you want legal advice Elon, I charge by the hour
What currency has a low enough value to make the least denominated unit viable as payment?
No one is denying that. But my initial point was this all happened way before Elon. Social media has had this issue since day one, but that does not stop some here to claim it got so much worse since Elon took over. I'm pointing out double standards here, way before someone wanted to know my position on the holocaust or covidYou think social media hasnt impacted the spread of people believing in conspiracy theories? Surely you can comprehend that this can be more complex than someone reading it and at that moment deciding to believe it
They call it a rabbit hole for a reason. And confirmation bias works exceptionally well in conjunction with social media algorithms.
I’ll take that as closure to the discussion you conceding that you now understand the issue Twitter has and always had around content moderation.
That's racist. I'm gonna call Knight Pexbo
Bison dollars.
It absolutely was all happening before Elon, but that doesn't mean Elon hasn't made it worse. He's personally retweeted dangerous conspiracy theories.
To be fair that still makes more sense than calling me racist for not wanting Qatar
(Which others have)It is not only Twitter's problem. It is not only Elon's problem. And it is not only a problem since Elon took over Twitter. I know you're butthurt that your least favorite billionaire who disagrees with your political views has taken over your favorite social media platform. But it does not change the fact that there were issues way before that. Issues that you did not seem to care as much before either. And that is why I call out hypocrites.
Who gets to decide what is or isn't forbidden
Well, Twitter claimed that racial comments declined. Now, I have no clue if it increased or decreased, but I'd bet 2 USD that you have no clue either, except your subjective feeling.
And even though I know I should not ask, but which dangerous theories did he spread? I must have missed these so I might jump on the bash Elon bandwagon after all
In the future, I hope uncle Elon
Before Elon they had literally teams of legal professionals ensuring the moderation kept within legal and regulatory boundaries.
Now they do not.
I’m not sure what you’re struggling with here?
Musk has taken those issues and made them far worse though. Just in the last few weeks the EU has highlighted that they're worried about disinformation on Twitter and they could be fined, Germany have said the same, there's concerns in the EU about GDPR and they're also under scrutiny for the way they've handled the redundancies as they didn't follow EU law.
Just a couple of these stories and they are regular occurrences now compared to very occasional before. The self regulation within Twitter has changed, but more than that it's starting to break laws where it didn't before.
Twitter hit with EU yellow card for lack of transparency on disinformation | Ars Technica
Germany reminds Musk that removing disinformation from Twitter is a must | Ars Technica
Are you seriously claiming no one is moderating and no governance is in place since Elon?
No-one knows as they've sacked their communications department (and that's actually true - there's no way of getting feedback from them as a company now)
Maybe you dont know, but take an educated guess
Surely a lot.
Of course it got worse, the owner is a conspiracy theory slreading shitposter and he let literal nazies back on Twitter. I doubt anylme claims it was lerfect before, but it has gotten worse for sure.
Meh, it was before full of commies and adolescents who love to get offended.
R'was the lerfect post.
To be fair, I do know and the teams are still there but have been gutted and a fraction of the size they were due to redundancies. That was reported on as well.
Which theories? And do you really think no Nazi guy was going back on Twitter before Elon? Your subtle dislike for Elon is clouding your senses. Or show me how many Nazis he brought back now compared to the past 10 years.
All Tech companies are currently firing thousands of employees, across all departments. And of course some of the current staff is not happy about the changes or Elon taking over, as he does not share their believes or views. But they live in a liberal world where you can take your own decisions if you disagree with something.