4 ms·

> inconsistent with everything people like Musk and Yacarino have said in the past about free speech Or maybe they were lying the whole time and it never actua

by xg15 2y ago

> inconsistent with everything people like Musk and Yacarino have said in the past about free speech Or maybe they were lying the whole time and it never actually was about free speech... > until there's an official explanation from X.com In the case that he did act intentionally, why would he ever give an official explanation if he could just as well leave it ambiguous?

Arnt 2y ago
Be generous, please. We generally call people honest if their words reflect their intentions. If their actions lead to a different outcome than intended, that's generally something we call "being wrong", not "lying". Sometimes we call it "being stupid", e.g. when someone fires the abuse team and advertisers dislike the result. Btw. I think there's no official explanation because the team that could have written one has been fired. Firing everyone means that instructions like "leave it ambiguous" are meaningless, because there's no one around to carry the instructions out.
- xg15 2y ago
  Everyone gets the benefit of doubt, but there is enough evidence that Twitter's definition of "free speech" is just as selective after the takeover as before, it just changed the political direction. There are also enough reports of pretty stuff like disallowing links to competing networks, artificial slowing navigation to Washington Post articles, etc. None of that is very much in the spirit of free speech.
- root_axis 2y ago
  There's plenty of evidence to show that the free speech claim was a lie. There are many examples of twitter targeting particular individuals based on Elon's prerogatives. Of course the site belongs to him, so it is what it is, but it's clear that the free speech thing was a lie (which frankly is always the case with people who claim to be free speech absolutists)
- popalchemist 2y ago
  Musk has a storied history of lying through his teeth and has been investigated for it by the federal government in the past (FCC, SEC, etc). On top of that he just gave $45m to Trump, Harris's opponent, and Trump has publicly said that Musk was so desperate he would have kneeled down and begged Trump for support on his various business plans to get them. There is enough there to warrant treating him not as an innocent but as a corrupt bad actor. He has motive, a criminal record, and statements by his own allies stating a lack of integrity.
- rsynnott 2y ago
  I mean, look, if you’re still giving Naughty Old Mr Car the benefit of the doubt in 2024… well, that’s your business, I suppose, but at a certain point most peoples’ credulity will be stretched.

by xg15 2y ago

Arnt 2y ago

Be generous, please. We generally call people honest if their words reflect their intentions. If their actions lead to a different outcome than intended, that's generally something we call "being wrong", not "lying". Sometimes we call it "being stupid", e.g. when someone fires the abuse team and advertisers dislike the result. Btw. I think there's no official explanation because the team that could have written one has been fired. Firing everyone means that instructions like "leave it ambiguous" are meaningless, because there's no one around to carry the instructions out.

xg15 2y ago
Everyone gets the benefit of doubt, but there is enough evidence that Twitter's definition of "free speech" is just as selective after the takeover as before, it just changed the political direction. There are also enough reports of pretty stuff like disallowing links to competing networks, artificial slowing navigation to Washington Post articles, etc. None of that is very much in the spirit of free speech.
root_axis 2y ago
There's plenty of evidence to show that the free speech claim was a lie. There are many examples of twitter targeting particular individuals based on Elon's prerogatives. Of course the site belongs to him, so it is what it is, but it's clear that the free speech thing was a lie (which frankly is always the case with people who claim to be free speech absolutists)
popalchemist 2y ago
Musk has a storied history of lying through his teeth and has been investigated for it by the federal government in the past (FCC, SEC, etc). On top of that he just gave $45m to Trump, Harris's opponent, and Trump has publicly said that Musk was so desperate he would have kneeled down and begged Trump for support on his various business plans to get them. There is enough there to warrant treating him not as an innocent but as a corrupt bad actor. He has motive, a criminal record, and statements by his own allies stating a lack of integrity.
rsynnott 2y ago
I mean, look, if you’re still giving Naughty Old Mr Car the benefit of the doubt in 2024… well, that’s your business, I suppose, but at a certain point most peoples’ credulity will be stretched.