3 ms·

My mistake, it's late for me. I'm still confused about what "less censorship" could mean, he seems pretty clear on it. And what governance happens public or p

My mistake, it's late for me. I'm still confused about what "less censorship" could mean, he seems pretty clear on it. And what governance happens public or private that "we" all agree on? Right now "we" don't agree on how Twitter operates currently. A couple dozen people do. I'm not understanding your point here.

emodendroket 5y ago
We’ve been hearing bad-faith censorship debates long enough to know how this song and dance goes, haven’t we? “If I say something, no matter how vacuous and offensive, that’s free speech. But if you criticize it or otherwise say something I disagree with, that’s censorship.” Beyond that, the idea of a totally unfettered Twitter is not really desirable. Such forums fill up with porn, gore, racism, and various other forms of shock content nobody actually wants on their feeds.
- gameman144 5y ago
  I've seen no advocates of saying that individuals shouldn't be able to curate their own feeds, only that social media platforms shouldn't be restricting those feeds for them. For instance, if you decide that you want a Twitter feed that excludes porn, gore, racism, and other objectionable content, then you absolutely should be able to exclude those (I'd reckon that that'd be a very sensible default). If I want to go observe the crazy bigoted things that fringe groups are spewing, or if I want to use Twitter just as an endless feed of porn, then that doesn't affect your ability to not see those things. Likewise, I've not heard Musk propose banning any of his critics or opposing viewpoints (though I don't really follow his actions, so it's possible I've just missed them).
  - andrepd 5y ago
    He has pursued aggressive union-busting, sued whistleblowers, sued people for posting videos that made telsa's """autopilot""" look bad. It's clear he doesn't give two shits about free speech, except when it costs him nothing to do so and therefore amounts to free virtue-signalling.
- ibeckermayer 5y ago
  > “If I say something, no matter how vacuous and offensive, that’s free speech. But if you criticize it or otherwise say something I disagree with, that’s censorship.” What an embarrassingly dishonest characterization of the problem. Nobody sane is arguing that "criticism is censorship". The problem with Twitter is that they are censoring popular narratives critical of the ruling elite. If you can't distinguish between the concept of banning accounts and posts vs not doing so, and allowing criticism, you are simply too misinformed or low IQ to have any worthwhile input. (Though I defend to the death your right to babble incoherently)
  - emodendroket 5y ago
    > What an embarrassingly dishonest characterization of the problem. Nobody sane is arguing that "criticism is censorship". Is that so? Why do the same people who claim they’re all about free speech get all wound up about “cancel culture” then? There are clearly rules in their head about who should actually have the right to say whatever they want. I quite confident that I am not “low-IQ.”
    - ibeckermayer 5y ago
      “Cancel culture” is about people losing their jobs and being censored from platforms like Twitter for making arguments or jokes that rub the politically powerful the wrong way. Again, it’s the active removal of the practical ability of expression that rational adults are concerned with, not the fact that others have contrary opinions to them. Again, you are exposing your ignorance.
      - emodendroket 5y ago
        This is something you could only claim to believe if you paid no attention to the way people actually use the term.
        LMYahooTFY 4y ago
        This is a very lame dismissal, which I'll just respond to similarly: "Cancel culture" very clearly had crowds of people demanding someone lose money/access to a job/platform. Perhaps we're just in different bubbles that don't overlap.

emodendroket 5y ago

We’ve been hearing bad-faith censorship debates long enough to know how this song and dance goes, haven’t we? “If I say something, no matter how vacuous and offensive, that’s free speech. But if you criticize it or otherwise say something I disagree with, that’s censorship.” Beyond that, the idea of a totally unfettered Twitter is not really desirable. Such forums fill up with porn, gore, racism, and various other forms of shock content nobody actually wants on their feeds.

gameman144 5y ago
I've seen no advocates of saying that individuals shouldn't be able to curate their own feeds, only that social media platforms shouldn't be restricting those feeds for them. For instance, if you decide that you want a Twitter feed that excludes porn, gore, racism, and other objectionable content, then you absolutely should be able to exclude those (I'd reckon that that'd be a very sensible default). If I want to go observe the crazy bigoted things that fringe groups are spewing, or if I want to use Twitter just as an endless feed of porn, then that doesn't affect your ability to not see those things. Likewise, I've not heard Musk propose banning any of his critics or opposing viewpoints (though I don't really follow his actions, so it's possible I've just missed them).
- andrepd 5y ago
  He has pursued aggressive union-busting, sued whistleblowers, sued people for posting videos that made telsa's """autopilot""" look bad. It's clear he doesn't give two shits about free speech, except when it costs him nothing to do so and therefore amounts to free virtue-signalling.
ibeckermayer 5y ago
> “If I say something, no matter how vacuous and offensive, that’s free speech. But if you criticize it or otherwise say something I disagree with, that’s censorship.” What an embarrassingly dishonest characterization of the problem. Nobody sane is arguing that "criticism is censorship". The problem with Twitter is that they are censoring popular narratives critical of the ruling elite. If you can't distinguish between the concept of banning accounts and posts vs not doing so, and allowing criticism, you are simply too misinformed or low IQ to have any worthwhile input. (Though I defend to the death your right to babble incoherently)
- emodendroket 5y ago
  > What an embarrassingly dishonest characterization of the problem. Nobody sane is arguing that "criticism is censorship". Is that so? Why do the same people who claim they’re all about free speech get all wound up about “cancel culture” then? There are clearly rules in their head about who should actually have the right to say whatever they want. I quite confident that I am not “low-IQ.”
  - ibeckermayer 5y ago
    “Cancel culture” is about people losing their jobs and being censored from platforms like Twitter for making arguments or jokes that rub the politically powerful the wrong way. Again, it’s the active removal of the practical ability of expression that rational adults are concerned with, not the fact that others have contrary opinions to them. Again, you are exposing your ignorance.
    - emodendroket 5y ago
      This is something you could only claim to believe if you paid no attention to the way people actually use the term.
      - LMYahooTFY 4y ago
        This is a very lame dismissal, which I'll just respond to similarly: "Cancel culture" very clearly had crowds of people demanding someone lose money/access to a job/platform. Perhaps we're just in different bubbles that don't overlap.