3 ms·
"If Starmer is successful in banning X in Britain, I will move forward in . . ."
- chrisjj 10mo agoIf Starmer is successful in banning @X in Britain, I will move forward with legislation that is currently being drafted to sanction not only Starmer, but Britain as a whole. Official account for FL-13 Rep. Anna Paulina Luna | Serving on @GOPOversight & @HouseForeignGOP | Wife-Mom-USAF Veteran
- SockThief 10mo agohttps://xcancel.com/RepLuna/status/2009460496668426449#m https://xcancel.com/RepLuna/status/2009460496668426449#m
- chrisjj 10mo ago> legislation that is currently being drafted to sanction not only Starmer What legislation? The US needed none in previous cases e.g. https://europeannewsroom.com/us-bans-visa-for-breton-he-censored-americans-and-harmed-big-tech/ https://europeannewsroom.com/us-bans-visa-for-breton-he-cens...
- tonnydourado 10mo agoAh, yes, the famously very effective sanctions against Brazilian judges. I'm sure it will work again. /sarcasm
- blibble 10mo agorepublicans are pro-CSAM now?
- Jgoauh 10mo agoalways have been
- jennyholzer4 10mo agoi thought the term was "pedophile" correction: Republicans are pro-pedophile
- chrisjj 10mo agoThere is a big difference in UK. One is illegal; the other not.
- _menelaus 10mo ago[flagged]
- jennyholzer4 10mo ago[dead]
- SkipperCat 10mo agoThis is why we need to bust up monopolies.
- themafia 10mo agoThat's the problem with social media. Other than their inertia they have nothing to apparently sell. Other than at their scale the user data isn't particularly valuable to private or government interests either. We live in an era plagued by the zombified dreams of the 90s.
- ben_w 10mo agoX isn't even a monopoly. Before Musk used one of his other companies to buy it from himself, the general consensus was that he'd lost the overwhelming majority of users and revenue it had at the initial privatisation. Facebook, that could count as… if not "monopoly" then certainly "dominant market position". But not X, not at this point.
- eterm 10mo agoBizarre that the US legislature is going to bat for the right of a corporation to sell illegal content in a foreign country. The UK should call their bluff on this one, appeasement isn't going to work forever.
- 0manrho 10mo agoIt's what corporate capture looks like. She's either peacocking for corporate donors or trying to court musks/MAGA's favor. Also, there's a difference between 1 rep effectively shitposting on social media and the US government actually doing something. Regardless I agree, it's not a good look
- judahmeek 10mo agoLuna is hardcore MAGA so she's definitely throwing out red meat.
- _DeadFred_ 10mo agoIt's more bizarre that Apple and Google are allowing X/Grok apps that generate non-consensual AI images in their App stores.
- bigyabai 10mo agoThat's not bizarre. Nobody in their right mind should assume that Google or Apple are capable (let alone willing) of holding themselves accountable. They are subject to the same bullying and will do exactly as they're told. They are not moral stalwarts.
- seanalltogether 10mo agoMaybe Britain will introduce a ban unless X sells 80% of its UK operations to UK investors. nudge nudge wink wink
- matt-p 10mo agoThat would unironically be a good way of dealing with this. However it would probably be seen as just as hostile. I'm very against banning websites, however social media as a whole is doing detrimental harm to children and adults alike so I would not shed a tear as long as we also ban meta/tiktok/YouTube shorts.
- jennyholzer4 10mo agoWhat even is there on twitter these days except neo-nazi hatemongering and LLM generated child porn?
- lm28469 10mo agoRussian and Israeli bots pretending to be Americans mostly, and brain dead americans who didn't yet realize they're interacting with bots
- Esophagus4 10mo agoOh, and people who want to be famous political pundits, but aren't yet famous political pundits.
- rvz 10mo ago> however social media as a whole is doing detrimental harm to children and adults alike so I would not shed a tear as long as we also ban meta/tiktok/YouTube shorts. You would then have to ban the VPNs as usage will just accelerate if that happens. The result would be no better than what happened to TikTok when that went offline in the US.
- 10mo ago
- themafia 10mo agoSnow Crash looks more and more realistic every year.
- chrisjj 10mo agoThere are always technical bugs during the early phases of new technology, especially AI Hmm. Not convinced this illegal undressing is a technical bug.
- lm28469 10mo ago[flagged]
- matt-p 10mo agoAll of a sudden??
- lm28469 10mo agoWhen a was a teenager, not so long ago really, everyone wanted to move the US and saw them as a global cultural power. The only people who truly disliked them were a minority anti capitalists, most people had positive views about Americans. Now wherever I look at, from far left to far right, virtually no one fully support the BS they're currently pushing, even the usual bootlicking lapdogs are staying silent. In recent German polls about which countries are considered partners the US is barely ahead of Russia.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- rich_sasha 10mo ago> In recent German polls about which countries are considered partners the US is barely ahead of Russia. Interesting. I thought AfD is ahead in the polls and very pro-Russian, how do I reconcile these observations?
- lm28469 10mo agoAfD gets 30% of votes, the turnout isn't even 80% so even if we consider 100% of them are brain dead putin balls garglers, which isn't even remotely true, that's 14m people out of ~60m people legally allowed to vote.
- muwtyhg 10mo agoThese numbers look pretty similar to Trump's voter base in 2024. He got 49% of the vote from the 60% of the population that can vote, so about 30% of all possible votes.
- RobotToaster 10mo agoAmerica sanctioning the UK is the only thing I can imagine that would make the UK even consider rejoining the EU.
- Hamuko 10mo agoDoes the US congress not have a better hill to die on?
- wooger 10mo agoI find it bizarre that x isn't already blocked in Britain given that it's full of porn, and seemingly doesn't do any of the required proof of age checks required by every other porn website under current UK legislation.
- miohtama 10mo agoProof or didn't happen
- matt-p 10mo agoWe don't actually really have the ability to hard block stuff. ISPs can be subject to court orders individually but the costs of implementation are bourne by the third-party or government so they don't like doing it. Best case you get the top 5 ISPs to block it because they already have the infrastructure in place, the smaller ones don't though.
- nirui 10mo agoFunny enough, based on my observation, X (formerly know as Twitter) is more likely to ban/shadowban normal users who has weak engagements than algorithm-optimized bots. A lot of bots are posting pornographic content or selling illegal items on that platform. And since many of the bots are "verified", it is harder to filter them out completely. The whole thing is a mess at this point.
- 10mo ago
- kolektiv 10mo agoAs I'm from - and in - the UK, let's have a look at this shall we? Both the tweet and the one to which it's responding... > There are always technical bugs during the early phases of new technology, especially AI, and those issues are typically addressed quickly. But this is precisely the point - they haven't been addressed quickly, they've been excused and generally ignored/used to troll. I believe they've now been moved behind a paywall, which is certainly one way to communicate how you feel about CSAM material. > Let’s be clear: this is not about technical compliance. This is a political war against @elonmusk and free speech—nothing more. Hardly - X has acted without any real consequence here for ages, despite turning into an absolute cesspit. MPs, Ministers, government departments - many are still using it despite everything. That aside, that a different country has slightly different views on free speech than (part of) your own country is not, in any way, a crime. Most nations have some speech which is restricted, at least in some circumstances, the US is no exception to this. Now, onto the "inspiration"... > The UK jails people for calling rapists "pigs." Does it? Show me. Show me the case where that has happened. Our legal rulings are public. > ...various other unhinged lunacy until... > Starmer is just punishing a platform that won't bend the knee. Do these people have the concept of irony surgically extracted? Everything Trump does is generally about punishing people that won't bend the knee/pay him/hand over a chunk of their Kingdom. "Country actually enforces own law" shouldn't really be a headline, but I guess for these people it is now...
- miohtama 10mo agoNote that the recent controversy is about Grok, not Twitter. The UK wants to ban generative image models without censorship. Grok has had censorship functions before. But someone found a week or so ago they can ask Grok to redraw clothes as bikinis. Not sure if this was a real SNAFU, not intentional.
- sam_lowry_ 10mo agoSo what?
- chrisjj 10mo ago> Note that the recent controversy is about Grok, not Twitter. You heard the prime minister yesterday. He was abundantly clear that X needs to act, and needs to act now. It is time for X to grip this issue. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/09/no-10-condemns-move-by-x-to-restrict-grok-ai-image-creation-tool-as-insulting https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/09/no-10-con...
- xnx 10mo agoDon't reward this type of post with your attention. This is messaging from 1 (of 453) Congressional reps to the president and voters. It is not realistic policy.
- perihelions 10mo ago> "It is not realistic policy." Literally already happened, two weeks ago (Thierry Breton / Digital Services Act).
- bayindirh 10mo agoCan someone explain why the hate and asymmetry in play? Does US trying to apply the golden rule of the golden rules: "Who has the gold writes the rule"?
- tim333 10mo agoPreston Byrne goes on about it https://x.com/titcoinpodcast/status/2009734475215733161 https://x.com/titcoinpodcast/status/2009734475215733161 It's a mix of things - most platforms like x and fb being based in the US, US free speech laws, the gold thing etc.
- dredmorbius 10mo agoAlt link: <https://xcancel.com/RepLuna/status/2009460496668426449 https://xcancel.com/RepLuna/status/2009460496668426449>
- perihelions 10mo agoRelated: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46374248 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46374248 ("Former EU commissioner and activists barred from US (theguardian.com)"; 16 days ago, 39 comments) ("Rogers called [Thierry] Breton – who served as the European Commissioner for the internal market from 2019-2024 – “a mastermind” of the [Digital Services Act]") That was, like this, a direct conflict between Elon Musk and EU regulators over illegal content, which resulted in Musk effecting US foreign policy, and sanctioning a top EU official.
- razingeden 10mo agoyet they won’t do anything on 1A grounds when “x” censors or shadow bans Americans without anything resembling good cause other than maybe you looked at some eceleb cancer funny and got mass reported or “voted for the wrong person.” The definition of which apparently changes on the whims of advertisers, empaneled government boards behind closed doors, or whoever buys the company— (who, themselves might have the freedom to switch and vocally support different parties from one election to the next. But not you.) curious. I wish Luna and her colleagues would be as ardent about defending the 1A rights of Americans using these platforms in America, as she is about… anyone, anywhere in the world except for Americans. So they can draft and or pass a bill cracking down on and sanctioning a whole entire government for suppressing speech of non Americans. Twice! For Brazil and UK! But they won’t draft or pass a bill that touches Meta or X or their ilk for suppressing legal, respectfully posited, non-obscene , non-violent speech of Americans. Speech where the only issue is that it displeases Toyota or Apple or Debbie Schultz or Allison Fauci … or whomever. They’re not protecting UK citizens or anyone. They’re protecting the platforms and their income streams. That’s why they won’t ever do that. I’m trying to be nice here but the nicest word I have for the United States Congress rn is “useless.”
- damnitbuilds 10mo agoNo one should care about fake pictures of celebrities. People have been drawing tits on pictures for centuries. Deal with it, you precious attention-seeking whiners. But do not be ridiculous - Musk's AI generating child porn is not an "excuse" to ban it, it is a reason to ban it. Banning the generation of child porn is not repressing free speech, it is enforcing decency and protecting children. If Grok cannot be configured to prevent the generation of child porn ( can that be done, Musk ? ), it must be banned. And that should happen in every decent country. [ This comment has been copied from an unpopular version of this discussion - why doesn't HN merge duplicate threads ? ]