Elon Musk buys Twitter to bring back Free Speech

[AnnabelleApocalypse]

42 minutes ago, StarlanderGoods said:

She is dying to say that covid is not real, but knows it would be too unpopular.

Careful or the mole will get you!

Erm.....something something.......Elon Musk.

Edited April 26, 2022 by AnnabelleApocalypse

[Rowan Amore]

@StarlanderGoodsIt was headed that direction from Page 1.  This thread is just a roundabout way back to bring it all back up again.  Tiresome.

[Arielle Popstar]

43 minutes ago, StarlanderGoods said:

She is dying to say that covid is not real, but knows it would be too unpopular.

 

26 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

@StarlanderGoodsIt was headed that direction from Page 1.  This thread is just a roundabout way back to bring it all back up again.  Tiresome.

Naw, you'll have to troll harder. 

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Arielle Popstar said:

the tech, medical and scientific fields as increasingly speech in those areas is labeled misinformation where it does not serve the financial interests of certain corporations, groups and governments.

 

Where did you read this disinformation? Seriously, I'd like to know. Was if Fox or some other News Corp outlet owned by Murdock like the New York Post or the Wall Street Journal? 

[Blaise Glendevon]

2 hours ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

 

This jackass.

"Free speech" doesn't mean "free reign for bigots, 'phobes, anti-science propagandists, and paranoid goons and goblins to spread misinformation and hate."

[Rowan Amore]

It's exactly what happened, page 1.  Just reporting facts, not trolling.  Free speech and all that.

21 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

It can be depending on how far it goes. Consider the censorship that can result from deleting tweets and tweeters involving their

COVID-19 misleading information policy

Couldn't have made your point without a Covid reference or a trump cartoon?

21 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

It does not matter what I think. Censorship is the withholding of information on which people could make an informed choice. News Media is only supposed to report news information, not pretend it is a scientific organization that has all the answers.

Withholding misinformation is not the same as withholding credible information.  

Anyway, I've had this discussion with you before.  

I'll leave you to your thread.

[Silent Mistwalker]

1 hour ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

You say that as if it isn't just a big fun Mr. Microphone for him.

 

They always came out with the good stuff AFTER I graduated from high school! 🤬🤭

[Lindal Kidd]

3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I've worked on digital jobs for companies, and sometimes I've needed others with specific skills to complete said jobs. Let's say I hired one of the expert scripters we have in SL and discovered they were posting racist, sexist, or homophobic views on Twitter. I don't want anyone like that associated with my company, so why would it be wrong to fire them or "cancel" them?  It's not about balancing their words with my words of confrontation on their Twitter account -- I simply don't want to associate with jerks and why should I have to do so because of this "cancellation" phobia many are disturbed about?

That's a different scenario, and is not "cancellation" in my view. Although firing someone for having different views from you carries its own set of legal perils.

 

[Scylla Rhiadra]

Me? 

I can hardly wait to start calling it "Mutter."

[Lindal Kidd]

I get a giggle over the notion that he spent $46B to silence that "Elon's Jet" account...he initially offered the kid $5,000, but then was unwilling to negotiate when the kid asked for $100K.

I guess it really could be a case of "billions for revenge, but not one cent for blackmail". But if so, wow. Just wow.

[AnthonyJoanne]

Ok - I'm going to make a great deal of effort to comply with the rules and avoid topics which are likely to derail the thread.

There is ample evidence that twitter has, in the past, deliberately and knowingly enabled disinformation. Note that I said disinformation and not misinformation. Disinformation is deliberately spreading false information with the intent to deceive.

I could list a few of those lies that twitter willingly enabled, however they are all what would be classed as 'hot button topics'.

Twitter has frequently suppressed people posting what later turned out to be completely accurate facts. Again ... 'hot button topics'.

I could list a number of other issues, but not surprisingly ... they are all 'hot button topics' and more often than not they are political.

One can, however, search using an unbiased search engine (assuming you've made the effort to find one: Here's a hint, Google and Duck Duck Go are NOT reliable unbiased search engines and openly admit that they are not) and find literally thousands of concrete examples where Twitter displayed blatant bias. Even to the extent of permitting actual death threats which, I'm sure you will agree, violated TOS ... except when it suits the Twitter-approved-narrative.

And yet people are stressing about Elon Musk having control?

It seems to me that the only thing those people are worried about is that Musk won't approve the same narrative.

If Musk forces bias onto twitter (in any way) I'll be just as quick to condemn him. But so far, there is no evidence that he wishes to do so.

[Blaise Glendevon]

6 minutes ago, AnthonyJoanne said:

that Musk won't approve the same narrative.

What "narrative" is that?

Edited April 27, 2022 by Blaise Glendevon

[Ceka Cianci]

1 hour ago, AnthonyJoanne said:

Ok - I'm going to make a great deal of effort to comply with the rules and avoid topics which are likely to derail the thread.

There is ample evidence that twitter has, in the past, deliberately and knowingly enabled disinformation. Note that I said disinformation and not misinformation. Disinformation is deliberately spreading false information with the intent to deceive.

I could list a few of those lies that twitter willingly enabled, however they are all what would be classed as 'hot button topics'.

Twitter has frequently suppressed people posting what later turned out to be completely accurate facts. Again ... 'hot button topics'.

I could list a number of other issues, but not surprisingly ... they are all 'hot button topics' and more often than not they are political.

One can, however, search using an unbiased search engine (assuming you've made the effort to find one: Here's a hint, Google and Duck Duck Go are NOT reliable unbiased search engines and openly admit that they are not) and find literally thousands of concrete examples where Twitter displayed blatant bias. Even to the extent of permitting actual death threats which, I'm sure you will agree, violated TOS ... except when it suits the Twitter-approved-narrative.

And yet people are stressing about Elon Musk having control?

It seems to me that the only thing those people are worried about is that Musk won't approve the same narrative.

If Musk forces bias onto twitter (in any way) I'll be just as quick to condemn him. But so far, there is no evidence that he wishes to do so.

Damn, I thought DuckDuck Go was a reliable search engine.. That's the whole reason I went to it..

Can you recommend a good one? I even have their browser on my phone with the whole flame thing that clears everything..

[Rowan Amore]

6 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Damn, I thought DuckDuck Go was a reliable search engine.. That's the whole reason I went to it..

Can you recommend a good one? I even have their browser on my phone with the whole flame thing that clears everything..

I've been using Brave recently.

https://search.brave.com

[Ceka Cianci]

6 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

I've been using Brave recently.

https://search.brave.com

I got my reasons mixed up there for a second.. hehehe

The reason I went with DuckDuckGo was the privacy more than anything else.. Now I'm looking around and having doubts about that from what I'm reading about it..

I'm looking at some new ones now.. This Startpage one looks pretty interesting.

[Rowan Amore]

15 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

I got my reasons mixed up there for a second.. hehehe

The reason I went with DuckDuckGo was the privacy more than anything else.. Now I'm looking around and having doubts about that from what I'm reading about it..

I'm looking at some new ones now.. This Startpage one looks pretty interesting.

If privacy is important, Brave is ranking up there even though it's still in beta.  Their browser isn't too shabby either.

What is Brave Search? | Brave Browser

[Ceka Cianci]

8 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

If privacy is important, Brave is ranking up there even though it's still in beta.  Their browser isn't too shabby either.

What is Brave Search? | Brave Browser

I'm liking this StartPage.. It shows you what trackers are trying to track you and how many..

Each place you go gets a rating of 1 through 5  and gives you a list of what it's blocking, plus has a kind of VPN..

I'm gonna ahve to try them on my phone for sure

[Moondira]

2 hours ago, AnthonyJoanne said:

Ok - I'm going to make a great deal of effort to comply with the rules and avoid topics which are likely to derail the thread.

There is ample evidence that twitter has, in the past, deliberately and knowingly enabled disinformation. Note that I said disinformation and not misinformation. Disinformation is deliberately spreading false information with the intent to deceive.

I could list a few of those lies that twitter willingly enabled, however they are all what would be classed as 'hot button topics'.

Twitter has frequently suppressed people posting what later turned out to be completely accurate facts. Again ... 'hot button topics'.

I could list a number of other issues, but not surprisingly ... they are all 'hot button topics' and more often than not they are political.

One can, however, search using an unbiased search engine (assuming you've made the effort to find one: Here's a hint, Google and Duck Duck Go are NOT reliable unbiased search engines and openly admit that they are not) and find literally thousands of concrete examples where Twitter displayed blatant bias. Even to the extent of permitting actual death threats which, I'm sure you will agree, violated TOS ... except when it suits the Twitter-approved-narrative.

And yet people are stressing about Elon Musk having control?

It seems to me that the only thing those people are worried about is that Musk won't approve the same narrative.

If Musk forces bias onto twitter (in any way) I'll be just as quick to condemn him. But so far, there is no evidence that he wishes to do so.

He reminds me a lot of Ghandi and I can't wait to see what he will do with Twitter.

[Aethelwine]

8 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

I would like to see hate speech laws tightened in the US.  It looks like the EU is doing so.

I think many were astonished like me that a US court found Musk not guilty of defamation when he used Twitter to call the cave diver that put together the team that rescued the 12 Thai boys that got trapped a "pedo" because he had pointed out the autonomous vehicle system Musk was promoting wouldn't get around the corners. I very much doubt he would have won that case in Europe.

[Kimmi Zehetbauer]

If he cares for free speech --- he should buy Freakbook and change it so it doesn't monetize everything that it touches.

[Aethelwine]

1 hour ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

 

I am curious about your laugh reaction. Is there something funny about there being a difference in the way defamation is handled in the US from Europe? Or are you laughing because you think Musk baselessly calling some one that saved 12 boys lives a "pedo" funny in some way? Or something else entirely? 

[CaithLynnSayes]

21 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

I am curious about your laugh reaction. Is there something funny about there being a difference in the way defamation is handled in the US from Europe? Or are you laughing because you think Musk baselessly calling some one that saved 12 boys lives a "pedo" funny in some way? Or something else entirely? 

None of the above. I find it funny how all kinds of arguments are being pulled to justifying the "Elon bad" narrative. That is what i find funny. Not what you said specifically. I have removed the laugh emoticon from that post to avoid confusion.

I've seen a few people bring up some great arguments but those are conveniently ignored but no expense is spared to try and dig up anything, anything at all on Elon to, as i said, justify the narrative "Elon bad". Such a thing is really easy to do on just about anyone and then everyone just runs with it and uses that. Kinda pathetic in my view. Oh well.

[Anna Nova]

I HAD closed my twitter account - not actually left, just stopped following anyone, and stopped every logging-in.  But now I have started to use it again.  I only follow @elonmusk though.  Maybe I'll add @SLGridStatus, maybe...

[Aethelwine]

3 hours ago, CaithLynnSayes said:

None of the above. I find it funny how all kinds of arguments are being pulled to justifying the "Elon bad" narrative. That is what i find funny. Not what you said specifically. I have removed the laugh emoticon from that post to avoid confusion.

I've seen a few people bring up some great arguments but those are conveniently ignored but no expense is spared to try and dig up anything, anything at all on Elon to, as i said, justify the narrative "Elon bad". Such a thing is really easy to do on just about anyone and then everyone just runs with it and uses that. Kinda pathetic in my view. Oh well.

I didn't need to go digging any where further than my memory. It is only a few years ago and the utter crassness of his conduct on twitter memorable . I am surprised no one mentioned it before me. Perhaps it got more coverage in the UK, because of the target being British.  Legal arguments his council presented that claims made on twitter, aren't expected to be factual and therefore protected regardless of how serious the slander I think likely to cause anyone pause for thought for people that use it and for twitters long term future. 

[Ceka Cianci]

24 minutes ago, Aethelwine said:

I didn't need to go digging any where further than my memory. It is only a few years ago and the utter crassness of his conduct on twitter memorable . I am surprised no one mentioned it before me. Perhaps it got more coverage in the UK, because of the target being British.  Legal arguments his council presented that claims made on twitter, aren't expected to be factual and therefore protected regardless of how serious the slander I think likely to cause anyone pause for thought for people that use it and for twitters long term future. 

If you think he's bad, you should hear Seth Rogen go off.. He's like really bad.. hehehe

A lot of people that should be banned but never get banned..

For someone that smokes pot like Seth does, he sure is wired as tight as a drum on twitter.. Threatening to kill people ( ETA:The threat of  killing part was more fictional threat really but would have gotten anyone else banned, something about throwing someone off a cliff ) and all kinds of stuff..

He threatened Tulsi Gabbard one time, said he was in his car and on his way to her house..

She tweeted back saying something like, Good luck driving to Hawaii from California..

hehehehe

Edited April 27, 2022 by Ceka Cianci