unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

Musk wanting Twitter to be fair is one of the most BS things I've heard in recent history. He could spend the barest fraction of 40 billion on making his own Musk-brand social media app where all his sycophants can congregate. Why does he need Twitter for free speech? Same with any of the other rich people moaning and groaning about twitter, facebook, etc., like fuck off.
Larssen
Member
+94|1308
I do agree with the sentiment that it shouldn't be twitter's job to regulate/censor/factcheck its own marketspace. It's first and foremost a failure on the part of your federal government and the EU that this never happened.

Don't think that's Musk's argument though, dude's a cunt.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

Companies like facebook have been profiting from ads on fake news, or ads that are fake news, with user-targeted algorithms. And then they turn around and whine that they shouldn't have to be moderators of content on their site. As if that's what legislators were raising fingers over: stuff like racist posts on a religion group or whatever. The discourse then kicks off the pool wall and flounders in the opposite direction.

I don't think social media company people shed a single tear over any just or unjust (to the limited extent those words can be applied to social media tos) ban.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2022-05-11 01:23:52)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

It's also been said before that if the social media companies want to swim in the big kids' pool with the news people, they should at least follow a similar set of rules.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,786|5527|eXtreme to the maX
Yes, people who are banned should stay banned.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

This idea of social media as a mighty tool for free speech and public discourse is the greatest camouflage for selling account data to advertisers. These companies can just roll out the ol' "hey, it's not our job to be 'arbiters of user-posted content'" to distract from their questionable behavior.

Occasionally facebook sends me an email trying to hook me up with people I know. I, of course, know none of them because my nameholder account is filled out with incorrect information. Some measure of satisfaction in that they may be selling a bill of goods in the form of my info. I don't post anything there either so I've never had it called into question by some nosy company moderator like others have reported on their experience with the company. "You need to provide a real photograph" lol, what are you the DOL?
Larssen
Member
+94|1308
The judgment on moral and ethical issues in the digital space, whether it pertains to social media and ads or the deployment of algorithms, should not and demonstrably cannot be in the hands of executive boards of private enterprises. The real issue here is that in 2022 your political class has still failed to produce any sort of guidance and regulatory oversight save for pressuring platforms to combat illegal porn or handing over personal data of individuals of interest to law enforcement or shit like that. Yet all the attention is on people like Jack Dorsey and now Musk to 'do something'.

The entire digital space will remain a free for all arena if society in general and its political representation can't agree to regulate. Why is an effective case not being made? Who should be making it? How can these issues be brought to the attention of the powers that be?

I guess this whole clusterfuck is also part of the learning curve as we're adjusting to a life that's strongly influenced and even controlled by digital products and services. It's going to take some more time, and higher profile scandals than cambridge analytica even, for the population at large and in extension democracy to fully understand the ramifications of our new 'connected' lives.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

Er, I agree that the social media corporations can't and shouldn't be trusted with self-regulation or whatever the current complaint is. I just think that it's a bit of a disingenuous defense of theirs, publicly wringing their hands over the idea of policing posts (which they already do in terms of TOS etc.). "We're uncomfortable with the idea of being arbiters of freedom!" nobody's asking you to replace the courts or whatever, stop changing the topic and climb off your stilted high horse.

Our government has dropped the ball on this stuff, I can also agree on that. If you dig through some of my recent years posts you'll also find me grumbling about the Reagan FCC's removal of the (imperfect and not all-encompassing tbf) Fairness Doctrine, also very harmful to public discourse imo.

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

Elon Musk says Americans 'are trying to avoid going to work at all,' unlike Chinese workers who 'will be burning the 3 a.m. oil'
https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-mu … 2022-5?amp

Thanks for that, Musk.

The man who makes like $1M+/hr, def. wouldn't touch $1K/ with a 10' pole, wants to talk about how people making low two figures per or even less JuSt DoN'T wAnT tO wOrK! Do we need another rich person rolling out that sort of line? "Sorry there are no cheeseburgers, nobody wants to work."

Hee hee hee Elongated Muskrat nerd hero. Can go fornicate with a corkscrew.
uziq
Member
+475|2873
elon musk literally recycles a labour theory of value that was critiqued by marx as the self-deluding ideology of the capitalist class.

musk literally thinks that he's earned all of his wealth because he has 'solved' high-level puzzles. i.e. abstracting all of the labour and expertise of his actual workforce and accruing all of the achievement (and profits) to his singular 'genius'. this was literally the deluding ideology that marx/engels took to task in the landowners with their mines in ca. 1860.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

He just can't help himself. Tries to farm kudos and then blows it all out of the water with some retarded comment.

The article remembers Musk "famously" sleeping on the factory floor during Model 3 crunch. "Whenever they feel pain I want to feel worse pain" or however to paraphrase. Yes, Elon, your factory camping makes us all forget that you're an exploitative billionaire. You're just like us!
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,277|6137
musk been bought by the saudis, foreign govt censorship of twitter is ok
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
uziq
Member
+475|2873
the exact same saudi prince just kept his investment.  he already had a pretty large stake in twitter. the saudi thing in-itself is a bit of a red herring in this discussion.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,786|5527|eXtreme to the maX

Larssen wrote:

The judgment on moral and ethical issues in the digital space, whether it pertains to social media and ads or the deployment of algorithms, should not and demonstrably cannot be in the hands of executive boards of private enterprises.
All 'digital space' is owned by private enterprises.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+475|2873
i mean, the majority of the world's population literally use a version of the internet(s) that isn't owned by private enterprises, but go on.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,786|5527|eXtreme to the maX
You're talking about the actual tubes though.
The places people actually interact are all privately owned.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+475|2873
doesn't pertain to almost all of the chinese internet and it's social media companies, which are patently under the wing of the state, with their leading CEOs being disappeared or brought to heel, etc.

there are plenty of other models of the internet which don't pivot around us being the playthings of elon musk and his fucking inane marvel fantasies.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,786|5527|eXtreme to the maX
OK, lets give twitter to the chinese govt then.
No idea what point you're trying to make.

The fact is all western internet platforms are privately owned.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+475|2873
the point is that other frameworks and models of ownership are possible.

you’re arguing from an ex post facto position. ‘things are this way so that’s the way they must be’. errrrr yeah, that’s not what the entire field of politics is about.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

I don't understand your response dilbert, why would we need to give twitter to the chinese if we blocked the musk acquisition?
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,786|5527|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

i mean, the majority of the world's population literally use a version of the internet(s) that isn't owned by private enterprises, but go on.
Hahaha you're actually suggesting the Chinese model, where the govt owns the internet and the CCP cancels anyone who thinks the wrong thing, is the one we should go with? How does that work out for the average chinese?

Taking it a step further, if that had been enacted wouldn't that have meant that Trump would have been in control of twitter?

So.... the one person you want banned from twitter - to protect democracy and freedom of speech - would have been in control of it?

Honestly I think you're a very confused fellow, most likely your lifetime of drug-taking has left your head looking like a swiss cheese.

I can see why you'd be passionate about a platform created to parrot other peoples opinions though.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+475|2873
no, i'm not suggesting the chinese model? i'm stating, factually, that your assertion is incorrect. 'the internet is privatized'. erm, not for the majority of the world's population it's not?

the internet could be considered as a public good, i.e. communally owned, or as a utility that can be provided by the state. broadband internet is covered in government policy and whitepapers in the same way as transport links, education, energy supply, etc, are. so what's to say that it has to be privatized, and that's that? you are talking utter fucking nonsense.

blah blah blah inane and off-the-mark side-swipes from a 50-year-old man. sad!

there's also nothing in my posts to say i 'want' trump to be banned from twitter, as if i have some personal animus or take personal offence. i do not. he was banned from twitter for using it as a communications platform to incite a riot, do you remember? maybe you've forgot because you were too busy ranting about BLM 'riots'. trump used twitter to cheer on a crowd to 'hang mike pence' and got several police officers murdered. that seems like banworthy offence to me, no? and here you are whining all these years that i'm allowed on this forum because i posted nasty remarks and broke the 'rules of conduct' on a web forum for a computer game

i can see why you'd sympathize with the idea that middle-aged manbabies with too much disposable income get to do exactly as their poor insecure little egos demand, though.

Last edited by uziq (2022-05-15 01:41:25)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

For that battle in the US, whoever wins we lose. Imagine being free of companies like Comcast but then suddenly your state with its rotting roads, bridges, and third world waterworks is handed sole responsibility for your internet as well. Joy.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,786|5527|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

the internet could be considered as a public good, i.e. communally owned, or as a utility that can be provided by the state. broadband internet is covered in government policy and whitepapers in the same way as transport links, education, energy supply, etc, are.
So the internet is already largely publicly owned or governed, what are you saying now? The govt should buy Twitter?

Why are you so angry about Elon Musk buying Twitter?

Use the stick to point to the part of the doll where a nerd touched you.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,997|6193|USA

lul

More than 70% of Elon Musk's Twitter followers are spam or fake accounts, research groups say
https://www.businessinsider.co.za/elon- … ays-2022-5

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard