Twitter likely to take idiots offer to buy them for $43 billion

[ZiprHead]

Yeah, that's why Elmo bought Twitter.

 

[zorq]

Lol.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You fail to understand that the account tracking Elon's jet was relying on public information.

Here's all the birds flying around Las Vegas: https://www.flightradar24.com/36.12,-115.28/8#

(it used my location--you can move the viewpoint.)

Dude, his child was threatened. This gaslighting that his suspension of the doxers came out of the blue, for no reason, is incredibly dishonest.

First, I wouldn't call what he was doing doxxing as that was easily obtained information anyway.

Second, he suspended a lot more than the doxxer. Singular. The rest were suspended for discussing the issue. He obviously doesn't know about the Streisand Effect and is doubling down on his stupidity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yep. George Takei's post telling people he could be found on Post was edited with some bullshit that the link was dangerous.

Musk is showing that he's just as much a lying, snotty little baby as Trump.

Yeah, it's dangerous. To Twitter, not to the person following it.

 

[Patooka]

Ladies and gentlemen, your free speech warrior right here.

 

[Copernicus]

Yep. Musk said what he wanted to say, but the conversation got too hot for him to handle. So he fled.

 

[Metaphor]

Yep. Musk said what he wanted to say, but the conversation got too hot for him to handle. So he fled.

Being for free speech does not mean you are pro a captive audience.

 

[blastula]

Doxxing is only okay when left-wing journalists like Taylor Lorenz do it.

No, it's okay when Musk does it.

Who did Musk doxx?

He doxxed some guy's license plate last night. He earlier doxxed Twitter employees' names and emails with his "Twitter files" debacle.

The idea of Mastodon as an alternative seems laughable to me.

Tell that to Musk, he appears to disagree.

Mastodon is decentralised. There's no central authority to complain to when somebody uses language you don't like, which seems to me the reason some people are upset with new Twitter

I'm not sold on that place myself, but that's not why it won't work. There are multiple authorities to complain to at Mastodon, you can pick the area with the authority you like best. Twitter's authority is more centralized than ever now, so lack of a central one clearly is not what people are leaving for. And Twitter still does take complaints about language, even of comedy, depends on what you like.

 

[blastula]

Dude, his child was threatened.

Allegedly. Have you learned nothing from Smollett?

This gaslighting that his suspension of the doxers came out of the blue, for no reason, is incredibly dishonest.

It's a rule he invented last night, so it did come unexpectedly. And he's using the term doxxing very liberally, and as though it had anything to do with the alleged incident with his child and because of "real-time location info." But I didn't see anyone posting LoJack data, just flight data, which only tells you where a plane is.

And journalists weren't just kicked out for talking about elonjet, the business reporter Linette Lopez was suspended after several tweets simply critical of Musk without ever mentioning his precious plane.

Thread by @lopezlinette on Thread Reader App

@lopezlinette: .@elonmusk has always been vicious to anyone sharing info about his businesses. He once sued a source of mine for revealing shady practices at #Tesla, and security testified that Musk had his lackeys ...…

threadreaderapp.com

Even if elonjet could be called doxing, doxing is legal anyway, so why do you hate freedom?

 

[blastula]

Yep. Musk said what he wanted to say, but the conversation got too hot for him to handle. So he fled.

Being for free speech does not mean you are pro a captive audience.

He wasn't forced to be there. He jumped into the conversation on his own, and then jetted out quickly, as he was being asked questions, like Desantis fleeing from an abortion question.

I happened to be in that space at the time. (Spaces are a nice feature in Twitter.) A little while after he left, the space got shut down without warning and without the conservation being saved for playback as is normal. Another cowardly anti-speech move.

 

[blastula]

Good of you to give another example of Musk's incoherence/hypocrisy.

 

[Metaphor]

Doxxing is only okay when left-wing journalists like Taylor Lorenz do it.

No, it's okay when Musk does it.

Who did Musk doxx?

He doxxed some guy's license plate last night. He earlier doxxed Twitter employees' names and emails with his "Twitter files" debacle.

A license plate isn't doxxing. Names and emails would be.

The idea of Mastodon as an alternative seems laughable to me.

Tell that to Musk, he appears to disagree.

If Musk doesn't like Mastodon, that's no skin off my nose.

Mastodon is decentralised. There's no central authority to complain to when somebody uses language you don't like, which seems to me the reason some people are upset with new Twitter

I'm not sold on that place myself, but that's not why it won't work. There are multiple authorities to complain to at Mastodon, you can pick the area with the authority you like best.

If I understand correctly, you can pick a server whose blacklist of other servers accords as closely as possible to your tastes, but you can't kick a server off the Mastodon infrastructure itself.

Twitter's authority is more centralized than ever now, so lack of a central one clearly is not what people are leaving for. And Twitter still does take complaints about language, even of comedy, depends on what you like.

Yes, perhaps I should have worded my earlier statement better. Twitter no longer bans people according to the political tastes of the people who are leaving.

 

[Metaphor]

Yep. Musk said what he wanted to say, but the conversation got too hot for him to handle. So he fled.

Being for free speech does not mean you are pro a captive audience.

He wasn't forced to be there. He jumped into the conversation on his own, and then jetted out quickly, as he was being asked questions, like Desantis fleeing from an abortion question.

Yes, leaving when you don't want to answer questions is not somehow in conflict with being pro free speech. Being pro free speech doesn't mean you have to listen to somebody's speech.

I happened to be in that space at the time. (Spaces are a nice feature in Twitter.) A little while after he left, the space got shut down without warning and without the conservation being saved for playback as is normal. Another cowardly anti-speech move.

I don't know what 'spaces' are or what the rules are around them so I can't comment.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Meanwhile, over at Truth Social, there are serious problems as the TS sale goes sour.

More Trouble For Trump’s Truth Social: Three Execs Abruptly Depart SPAC As Lingering Investigations And Market Chaos Imperil Deal

The disclosure of three high-level departures comes one day after Trump hawked Truth Social's latest "major announcement"—a line of $99 NFTs.

www.forbes.com

 

[Copernicus]

Musk was embarrassed when his survey revealed that 59% of participants wanted the banned journalists to be reinstated immediately. Rather than to follow through on that result, he only said he would let them back if they deleted the tweets he did not like. IOW, he is insisting that those suspended validate his claim that there was something wrong or against Twitter policy in their tweets. It doesn't matter that he misled everyone into thinking that the journalists would be reinstated unconditionally if the survey results demanded reinstatement.

Elon Musk offers journalists he banned from Twitter ability to return under certain condition​

 

[Copernicus]

If I understand correctly, you can pick a server whose blacklist of other servers accords as closely as possible to your tastes, but you can't kick a server off the Mastodon infrastructure itself.

That isn't my understanding. Mastodon publishes strict content and behavioral guidelines. For example, child pornography is strictly forbidden. If a server owner does not comply with the requirement by removing violations, they can and should be kicked off of Mastodon. Moderation of content is distributed to local servers, but those servers are all centrally linked with each other such that users on local servers can see posts hosted on other servers.

 

[Copernicus]

Musk's erratic and capricious policies of Twitter management is about to come up against a new law in the EU that takes place in 2023. If he wants to stay in that market, he is going to have to implement stricter moderation policies and less arbitrary control over how the platform addresses content issues.

EU warns Musk that Twitter faces ban over content moderation -FT​

 

[Toni]

The reporter banned by Musk for allegedly doxxing him has been restored to Twitter. I think the other reporters have been as well but have not checked.

I do think that Musk and a lot of other rich and famous people have legitimate fears re: doxxing. People have been stalked, attacked, killed. Top of my head: Mr. Pelosi and John Lennon. The Lindberg baby.

 

[Elixir]

Musk's erratic and capricious policies of Twitter management is about to come up against a new law in the EU that takes place in 2023. If he wants to stay in that market, he is going to have to implement stricter moderation policies and less arbitrary control over how the platform addresses content issues.

EU warns Musk that Twitter faces ban over content moderation -FT​

That’s a start, if Elmer is educable.

 

[Metaphor]

That isn't my understanding. Mastodon publishes strict content and behavioral guidelines.

For example, child pornography is strictly forbidden. If a server owner does not comply with the requirement by removing violations, they can and should be kicked off of Mastodon.

Where did you get this information about central content and behavioural guidelines? I can't see anything about servers/nodes being kicked off Mastodon from the wikipedia page or Mastodon's website.

Moderation of content is distributed to local servers, but those servers are all centrally linked with each other such that users on local servers can see posts hosted on other servers.

Yes, but servers have servers/nodes have blacklists of other servers/nodes, and somebody who uses a server that blocks other servers will not see the content on that other server.

Wikipedia says:

Administrators of servers can block other servers from interacting with their own, an action called "defederation". Administrators and users rely on the "#fediblock" hashtag to alert others to troublesome servers, serving as a decentralized immune system for the network.

Now obviously all servers would have to comply with law (presumably of the country the server is hosting in), but I cannot see anything saying Mastodon itself (the non-profit that developed the network) has a central content moderation policy or control over who starts servers/nodes.