Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on October 30, 2022, 09:12:50 pm
-
Anyone not very, very worried about this headcase taking over Twitter is really not paying attention.
He's said he wants to have unrestricted free speech on Twitter.
He's owned Twitter for 72 hours.
In that time, a far right terrorist broke into the house of Nancy Pelosi with a hammer, and assaulted her 85 year old husband.
Musk's idea of supporting free speech on this issue has been not to encourage some introspection on the right of American politics on how it has got to this point.
It's been to push a batshit conspiracy from the far right that Pelosi's husband was actually hurt in a tiff with a left wing gay lover.
THE biggest medium of exchanges of ideas and opinions that humanity has ever produced. Now owned by a conspiracy theorist.
God help us.
-
Lula just nudges ahead in Brazil , tight mind , one percent lead with 70% of the votes counted .
-
Lula wins an astonishing victory in Brazil .
-
Just watched the Bolsonaro docs on BBC........ he's a bit out of the box and slightly unhinged..... very glad Luna won and let's hope the destruction of the Amazon is halted and reversed
-
How is Elon Musk a conspiracy theorist?
And where have you got it from that it was a politically motivated attack?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Ex-girlfriend-of-suspect-in-Paul-Pelosi-attack-17545968.php
-
How is Elon Musk a conspiracy theorist?
And where have you got it from that it was a politically motivated attack?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Ex-girlfriend-of-suspect-in-Paul-Pelosi-attack-17545968.php
He tweeted, linking to a far right conspiracy theorist spreading a batshit conspiracy that Pelosi's husband was attacked by a jilted left wing gay lover.
The man is playing silly f**kers with no thought for the responsibility he has. At least that's a kind interpretation of what he did. The less kind one is that he knows damn f**king well what he is doing - letting every conspiracy theorist off the leash.
Either way, it is massively dangerous.
-
How is Elon Musk a conspiracy theorist?
And where have you got it from that it was a politically motivated attack?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Ex-girlfriend-of-suspect-in-Paul-Pelosi-attack-17545968.php
He tweeted, linking to a far right conspiracy theorist spreading a batshit conspiracy that Pelosi's husband was attacked by a jilted left wing gay lover.
The man is playing silly f**kers with no thought for the responsibility he has. At least that's a kind interpretation of what he did. The less kind one is that he knows damn f**king well what he is doing - letting every conspiracy theorist off the leash.
Either way, it is massively dangerous.
What actually happened then? What was the motive? Any evidence as of yet?
Any dangerous speech that incites violence / hate speech gets you arrested. Apart from that, who gets to decide what “acceptable” speech is?
The selected articles for the trending page on Twitter have been left wing / progressive talking points for years now. You’d be a free speech absolutist if the political / cultural zeitgeist was overwhelmingly right wing and suppressed free speech that wasn’t deemed “acceptable”.
Not a right v left issue for me anyway just an example.
More censorship breeds more suspicion.
-
How is Elon Musk a conspiracy theorist?
And where have you got it from that it was a politically motivated attack?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Ex-girlfriend-of-suspect-in-Paul-Pelosi-attack-17545968.php
He tweeted, linking to a far right conspiracy theorist spreading a batshit conspiracy that Pelosi's husband was attacked by a jilted left wing gay lover.
The man is playing silly f**kers with no thought for the responsibility he has. At least that's a kind interpretation of what he did. The less kind one is that he knows damn f**king well what he is doing - letting every conspiracy theorist off the leash.
Either way, it is massively dangerous.
Talking about conspiracy theories…
-
The person who was arrested for stoving Mr Pelosi's head in has a record of posting far right nut case conspiracy shit. There is zero evidence that he is gay or had ever met Pelosi before.
Musk tweeted an article by a far right conspiracist claiming, with zero evidence that the attacker was a left wing gay lover of Pelosi's.
I know how classroom Libertarian theory works. But in the real world, when you wash your hands of the truth and allow everyone to have their say, what happens is that the truth gets washed away. And real people get really hurt.
Because this isn't a game or a student debating issue. It's about how we hold onto objective truth.
And the egomaniac owner of Twitter seems oblivious to that. And more than oblivious - actively pushing utter, utter shite that tries to blow smoke over a real issue where someone was out to kill a senior politician.
-
The person who was arrested for stoving Mr Pelosi's head in has a record of posting far right nut case conspiracy shit. There is zero evidence that he is gay or had ever met Pelosi before.
Musk tweeted an article by a far right conspiracist claiming, with zero evidence that the attacker was a left wing gay lover of Pelosi's.
I know how classroom Libertarian theory works. But in the real world, when you wash your hands of the truth and allow everyone to have their say, what happens is that the truth gets washed away. And real people get really hurt.
Because this isn't a game or a student debating issue. It's about how we hold onto objective truth.
And the egomaniac owner of Twitter seems oblivious to that. And more than oblivious - actively pushing utter, utter shite that tries to blow smoke over a real issue where someone was out to kill a senior politician.
So the court of BST concludes that a psychotic maniac attempted murder because Elon Musk bought Twitter. There will be some batshit crazy forums out there to influence him instead if this was politically motivated.
You would have believed Jussie Smollett’s story at first, but I wouldn’t take that right away from you. Because eventually, the truth comes out as it will in this instance.
And not all conspiracy theory is right-wing.
A lot of media outlets pushed that Trump 2016 election / brexit result was Russian collusion for example.
-
No Nc. I didn't conclude that. And I don't know how you reached the conclusion that I did.
My point was that Musk is prepared to dive into a very serious issue, pushing a clearly and unarguably wrong conspiracy theory, peddled by someone who wanted to deflect the blame from where it belonged. It gave massive publicity to that wrong conspiracy. That means there will be hundreds of thousands of people who will take away from this affair the belief that Pelosi didn't have his skull fractured by a far right head case who was trying to kill his wife.
I thought the problem with that was very obvious, but clearly I was wrong.
-
This has nothing to do with Musk in real terms. There will always be idiots that that crave attention by making inaccurate and controversial statements expecting people to believe them. ( look at some of the posters on this forum).
If it wasn’t twitter it would be some other outlet. It’s always been the case it’s just easier to do these days with people being obsessed with twitter and Facebook and others.
-
Phil
It's about Musk giving credence to that sort of conspiracy rubbish. If he was sensible he wouldn't have done that. If he was really responsible he'd have said it was bullshit. Instead, in many people's eyes, he gave it credence. .
That, coming from the man who now owns the biggest public debating system in human history is irresponsible at best. If it is an indicator of how he is going to run Twitter, it is very frightening.
-
We enjoy the freedom and prosperity of western civilisation because of a belief in free speech.
Ideas are debated, the best ones rise to the top and we progress.
If a conspiracy theory is so wild, let it out in the open so that everyone can see how silly it is.
No society is, or ever will be absolutely perfect, but you have to be careful what you wish for.
-
We enjoy the freedom and prosperity of western civilisation because of a belief in free speech.
Ideas are debated, the best ones rise to the top and we progress.
If a conspiracy theory is so wild, let it out in the open so that everyone can see how silly it is.
No society is, or ever will be absolutely perfect, but you have to be careful what you wish for.
Sadly, too many people believe the misinformation they read, and act on it - you only have to look at Brexit for an example!
But Musk agrees with you so you must be right....
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/twitter-restricts-access-content-enforcement-tools-1234622010/
Debate and free, (truthful), speech are absolutely fine; lies and deliberate misinformation are not!
-
We enjoy the freedom and prosperity of western civilisation because of a belief in free speech.
Ideas are debated, the best ones rise to the top and we progress.
If a conspiracy theory is so wild, let it out in the open so that everyone can see how silly it is.
No society is, or ever will be absolutely perfect, but you have to be careful what you wish for.
Sadly, too many people believe the misinformation they read, and act on it - you only have to look at Brexit for an example!
But Musk agrees with you so you must be right....
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/twitter-restricts-access-content-enforcement-tools-1234622010/
Debate and free, (truthful), speech are absolutely fine; lies and deliberate misinformation are not!
Absolutely bang on the head.
This isn't about suppressing genuine debate. It's about how you support the concept of Objective Truth, in an era where it is under deliberate and concerted attack from both far right domestic activists (and it IS predominantly a far right thing, before the squeals of "bias!" come in) and even moreso, from Russian state security who have been trying to destroy the concept of Objective Truth in social media as a matter of foreign policy.
If you lose any concept of what is true and what isn't, you cannot have a debate on which ideas are best. Because everyone can retreat to their own universe where they can be surrounded by facts (sic) that tell them they are right. That is why the undermining of Objective Truth, and the deliberate spreading of falsehood on a scale never before seen is THE biggest threat to humanity. You cannot tackle any problem if you don't tackle that one. Which is why someone as powerful as Musk f**king about spreading a malicious and deliberate lie, and bragging about de-censoring Twitter is SO dangerous.
-
the people that barred trump have been fired of course, not sure if separate from or along with the board but it's a disturbing thought that this nutjob may have a hand in elevating the other nutjob back into power.
-
Trump is a perfect case in point.
There wasn't a "debate" to be had about whether the election was "stolen".
Trump lied about it. Flat out.
Protecting Trump's "right" to say what he wanted on social media leads directly to millions of people believing that lie, and thousands breaking into Congress to stage a coup.
As I keep saying, this isn't some school debating club issue. It's about how you steer democratic systems through a minefield of deliberate action aimed at f**king people's minds through industrial scale lying.
-
Seems Musk deliberately wants the spread of misinformation....
https://aaronrupar.substack.com/p/elon-musk-twitter-free-speech-paul-pelosi
This is one very dangerous individual
-
The problem is subjectivity. Of course there are extremes where it’s difficult to defend (Trump included) but where is the line drawn? Too many people want voices shut down because they don’t like what they hear, not necessarily because it is lies and deliberate misinformation.
-
Have a look at this thread.
Should the person the thread is about be allowed to say what they want on Twitter?
https://mobile.twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1587372892286763009
-
I think the problem with objective truth is that there is very little in the universe that can categorically be proven to be 100% established fact. Our understanding of the world around us is constantly evolving and it would be breathtakingly naive to assume that we have even scratched the surface of everything there is to know. Our knowledge and understanding in the field of science for example is in itself a process of constant exploration, research and evolving ideas, to the extent that I personally find the concept of "established scientific fact" something of a contradiction in terms, particularly in reference to green issues. Once upon a time people thought the earth was flat didn't they? On that basis. who are you, I or anyone else to decide what is or is not to be tolerated in the media? Yes some people are more able than others to apply some critical thinking to what they're told, to cut through the crap and the cranks and the conspiracy theories and come to an informed and reasoned conclusion of their own and some people aren't quite so good at it. That's life! Some people are gullible, some people less so. BST's answer is as always for the state to legislate for the lowest common denominator rather than allow individualism.
George Orwell said the following in his introduction to Animal Farm in 1945 when commenting on the freedom of the press:
"At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas of which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is “not done” to say it… Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the high-brow periodicals.”
I believe that comment is as true today as it was in 1945 when he first wrote it. I'd far rather a world where people can make up their own minds as to what they believe to be true and what isn't instead of a socialist utopia where everyone is told what is true and what isn't. Big state/big brother socialism versus libertarianism again. The latter scares the hell out of people like BST.
-
Tommy.
This isn't a "all one way or all the other" thing. Nothing ever is, although many people like to portray differences of opinion like that because it's easy.
In the real world there are hard decisions to be taken, none of which will result in a perfect outcome. What we should always be striving for is a sensible balance.
Go back to my OP. Was it sensible or reasonable for a man in Musk's position to be pushing patently wrong conspiracies? Given that someone had just had his skull broken by a crazed far-right headcase who wanted to kill the third most prominent Democratic politician in the USA, was it reasonable for the new owner of Twitter to be supporting a lie?
There IS sch a thing as Objective Truth by the way.
Donny Rovers are in L2.
Putin has invaded Ukraine.
Donald Trump incited a coup attempt.
Jair Bolsonaro has just been beaten in an election.
You won't find many people question the first one.
A few will question the second.
Millions don't agree with the final two, but they are true, nonetheless.
-
Have a look at this thread.
Should the person the thread is about be allowed to say what they want on Twitter?
https://mobile.twitter.com/christogrozev/status/1587372892286763009
Yes.
People on Twitter can say / have said with authority:
- A man can become a woman / vice versa and influence young impressionable children to follow suit.
- Masks stop the spread of covid.
- Vaccine stops transmission.
- Trump election was Russian meddling
- Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinfo
- Brexit result was Russian meddling
- There is a conservative government conspiracy to deliberately let the NHS fail.
I’m guessing you have less of an issue with these falsehoods though.
Say what you like just don’t try to force other people what to think or there will be a backlash and a proliferation of more conspiracy theories. Because people wouldn’t trust politicians / mainstream media even more.
-
Tommy.
This isn't a "all one way or all the other" thing. Nothing ever is, although many people like to portray differences of opinion like that because it's easy.
In the real world there are hard decisions to be taken, none of which will result in a perfect outcome. What we should always be striving for is a sensible balance.
Go back to my OP. Was it sensible or reasonable for a man in Musk's position to be pushing patently wrong conspiracies? Given that someone had just had his skull broken by a crazed far-right headcase who wanted to kill the third most prominent Democratic politician in the USA, was it reasonable for the new owner of Twitter to be supporting a lie?
There IS sch a thing as Objective Truth by the way.
Donny Rovers are in L2.
Putin has invaded Ukraine.
Donald Trump incited a coup attempt.
Jair Bolsonaro has just been beaten in an election.
You won't find many people question the first one.
A few will question the second.
Millions don't agree with the final two, but they are true, nonetheless.
This is where linguistics can be a nightmare. No, Putin did not invade Ukraine, I’m pretty sure the Ukrainian armed forces could deal with one man. Russian armed forces who’s commander in chief is Putin have invaded Ukraine. Kinda backs up your point though. You made a state mate there which isn’t correct though we all know what you meant
-
Nc.
You're struggling here.
Every single one of those cases you give are ones where there is nuanced evidence. That has to be judged and honest people can have genuine differences of opinion and reach different conclusions. Yes I probably have a different opinion than you on every one of those issues, but, if you argue your case with evidence, I'll respect that.
The example I gave was not someone's opinion. It was an out and out lie.
Do you honestly not see the difference?
-
Nc.
You're struggling here.
Every single one of those cases you give are ones where there is nuanced evidence. That has to be judged and honest people can have genuine differences of opinion and reach different conclusions. Yes I probably have a different opinion than you on every one of those issues, but, if you argue your case with evidence, I'll respect that.
The example I gave was not someone's opinion. It was an out and out lie.
Do you honestly not see the difference?
People have been banned / shadow banned for expressing “unacceptable views” on the first 3 points.
Objective Truth may seem very clear within a thought bubble / echo chamber but as TommyC nicely put, it isn’t. I used those examples to try to challenge your thoughts.
You can’t police everybody’s thoughts and remove every lie on Twitter and I don’t have the urge to myself. It’s just not physically possible either. Musk has said he’ll get rid of every bit on Twitter though. How he will, I don’t know.
-
Nc
Can you give me an example of someone being banned for expressing "unacceptable views"? As opposed to people being banned for abuse or threats?
Regarding Objective Truth. Do you agree that the example I posted is a flat out lie, passed off as a truth? Someone claiming that he has evidence that Truss texted "Done it" to Blinken minutes after the Russian pipeline was blown up and that he knows this because he has seen the hacked messages from Truss's phone. A lie, agreed?
Do you agree that the stuff that Musk pushed about the Pelosi assassination attempt was a lie?
Only, for me, this elephant needs to be eaten one slice at a time. You take the position that it's too hard to tell truth from lies, you have given up the fight. For me, you start by identifying clear and unarguable falsehood, and you ban those who propagate them.
If that's too difficult to swallow, imagine you owned a newspaper. Imagine you had clear evidence that one of your journalists was regularly lying in print. Would you sack her?
-
This forum is a perfect example of people being incapable of reading things objectively.
-
The BBC spreads a lot of bat shit crazy stuff. As does most media. As does most education. So long as its in line with the opinion of Disgruntled of Denaby, its all good.
-
Nc
Can you give me an example of someone being banned for expressing "unacceptable views"? As opposed to people being banned for abuse or threats?
Regarding Objective Truth. Do you agree that the example I posted is a flat out lie, passed off as a truth? Someone claiming that he has evidence that Truss texted "Done it" to Blinken minutes after the Russian pipeline was blown up and that he knows this because he has seen the hacked messages from Truss's phone. A lie, agreed?
Do you agree that the stuff that Musk pushed about the Pelosi assassination attempt was a lie?
Only, for me, this elephant needs to be eaten one slice at a time. You take the position that it's too hard to tell truth from lies, you have given up the fight. For me, you start by identifying clear and unarguable falsehood, and you ban those who propagate them.
If that's too difficult to swallow, imagine you owned a newspaper. Imagine you had clear evidence that one of your journalists was regularly lying in print. Would you sack her?
Alex Berenson is a more high profile example. There are many more but due to its nature, shadow banning is hard to definitively prove.
Yes BST I accept that is a lie and I know that lying is wrong. But that’s not my point.
I used those examples to show that in recent years, an inconvenient alternative view gets labelled as disinformation. You won’t see it because of your worldview being different to mine.
Social media giants in recent years have seen themselves as the agents of social progress. But that means different things to different people.
Once you set the precedent to remove “disinformation”, you can change the definition of words such as “safety” and “harm” to remove just about anything you don’t like.
It’s a slippery slope. Jacinda Ardern and Justin Trudeau are examples of the start of this new form of creeping authoritarianism (you won’t have noticed it as you were cheering it on) . Imagine if they could have set the rules for Twitter?
Trudeau labelled those protesting against him as holding “unacceptable views” and also lazily labelled them as misogynistic and racist. He removed their bank accounts while trying to force them to have a medical procedure to keep their jobs. Did that not ring alarm bells for you?
-
I’d rather people didn’t post falsehoods online of course.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/covid-infected-people-with-taste-for-conspiracy-theories-tmz0g369z?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1666862108
The response of the last 2 years has made people MORE sceptical so that this is the result. As mentioned above, there will always be easily led people who lack critical thinking skills. Be more transparent and open in media and government and it gives less ammunition to these types.
-
If Twitter had been the town square throughout history, heretics would have been more effectively silenced and we’d likely still believe the earth was flat.
-
"Social media giants in recent years have seen themselves as the agents of social progress."
I'm sorry but this just takes the biscuit.
Have you not seen the way Facebook facilitated the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingia in Myanmar? Or claims of massive election fraud and intercommunal violence in East Africa? Or the propagation of The Great Replacement rubbish that has led to numerous fat right terrorist atrocities.
Berenson by the way is a perfect case in point of someone (temporarily) banned from Twitter for posting out and out lies repeatedly, which will have led to more people dying than if he'd shut the f**k up.
Here's a thought experiment. During WWII, if a prominent celebrity had gone on the radio every night insisting that the blackout had no effect on the ability of Luftwaffe bombers to target their attacks, and that therefore it was fine to leave your windows uncovered, would you have defended their right to say what they wanted?
-
If Twitter had been the town square throughout history, heretics would have been more effectively silenced and we’d likely still believe the earth was flat.
Point of fact.
The proof that the earth was round wasn't developed by heretics in a town square meeting. I'm really not sure what your point is here.
We make progress in our understanding of how the world works through the Scientific Method.
We observe the world.
We develop hypotheses on underlying principles, based on those observations.
We use those hypotheses to make predictions of how the world ought to work in hitherto unseen circumstances.
We try to observe those circumstances.
We see if the hypotheses broadly work. If they do, we think the hypotheses have merit. If they don't, we go back and rethink from the start.
That's how Objective Truth gets established.
The overwhelming majority of "heretics" don't engage with that process because it is f**king hard work. They shout out what they want to be true and drown out any evidence to the contrary.
An uncontrolled, unrefereed Town Square in the modern world is an anarchical mess with 2 billion people shouting what they want to be true, and always able to find some persuasive gobshit telling them what they want to hear. It's the road to social disintegration, and we are a good few miles down it already.
-
If Twitter had been the town square throughout history, heretics would have been more effectively silenced and we’d likely still believe the earth was flat.
Point of fact.
The proof that the earth was round wasn't developed by heretics in a town square meeting. I'm really not sure what your point is here.
We make progress in our understanding of how the world works through the Scientific Method.
We observe the world.
We develop hypotheses on underlying principles, based on those observations.
We use those hypotheses to make predictions of how the world ought to work in hitherto unseen circumstances.
We try to observe those circumstances.
We see if the hypotheses broadly work. If they do, we think the hypotheses have merit. If they don't, we go back and rethink from the start.
That's how Objective Truth gets established.
The overwhelming majority of "heretics" don't engage with that process because it is f**king hard work. They shout out what they want to be true and drown out any evidence to the contrary.
An uncontrolled, unrefereed Town Square in the modern world is an anarchical mess with 2 billion people shouting what they want to be true, and always able to find some persuasive gobshit telling them what they want to hear. It's the road to social disintegration, and we are a good few miles down it already.
Fair point. How about the one where the earth is the centre of the universe?
-
If Twitter had been the town square throughout history, heretics would have been more effectively silenced and we’d likely still believe the earth was flat.
Point of fact.
The proof that the earth was round wasn't developed by heretics in a town square meeting. I'm really not sure what your point is here.
We make progress in our understanding of how the world works through the Scientific Method.
We observe the world.
We develop hypotheses on underlying principles, based on those observations.
We use those hypotheses to make predictions of how the world ought to work in hitherto unseen circumstances.
We try to observe those circumstances.
We see if the hypotheses broadly work. If they do, we think the hypotheses have merit. If they don't, we go back and rethink from the start.
That's how Objective Truth gets established.
The overwhelming majority of "heretics" don't engage with that process because it is f**king hard work. They shout out what they want to be true and drown out any evidence to the contrary.
An uncontrolled, unrefereed Town Square in the modern world is an anarchical mess with 2 billion people shouting what they want to be true, and always able to find some persuasive gobshit telling them what they want to hear. It's the road to social disintegration, and we are a good few miles down it already.
Fair point. How about the one where the earth is the centre of the universe?
I genuinely haven't got a clue what you are on about.
-
If Twitter had been the town square throughout history, heretics would have been more effectively silenced and we’d likely still believe the earth was flat.
Point of fact.
The proof that the earth was round wasn't developed by heretics in a town square meeting. I'm really not sure what your point is here.
We make progress in our understanding of how the world works through the Scientific Method.
We observe the world.
We develop hypotheses on underlying principles, based on those observations.
We use those hypotheses to make predictions of how the world ought to work in hitherto unseen circumstances.
We try to observe those circumstances.
We see if the hypotheses broadly work. If they do, we think the hypotheses have merit. If they don't, we go back and rethink from the start.
That's how Objective Truth gets established.
The overwhelming majority of "heretics" don't engage with that process because it is f**king hard work. They shout out what they want to be true and drown out any evidence to the contrary.
An uncontrolled, unrefereed Town Square in the modern world is an anarchical mess with 2 billion people shouting what they want to be true, and always able to find some persuasive gobshit telling them what they want to hear. It's the road to social disintegration, and we are a good few miles down it already.
Fair point. How about the one where the earth is the centre of the universe?
I genuinely haven't got a clue what you are on about.
Copernicus?
-
Yup. It's outside of BSTs chosen subject era of 1932-45, so I should have explained more ;)
-
Copernicus was THE textbook example of someone following the Scientific Method! He didn't decide that the earth went round the sun on a whim, with no evidence.
He didn't deliberately misrepresent all the evidence to the contrary and repeatedly lie about it.
Please tell me you're not trying to draw a line linking Copernicus and Berenson!
-
"Social media giants in recent years have seen themselves as the agents of social progress."
I'm sorry but this just takes the biscuit.
Have you not seen the way Facebook facilitated the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingia in Myanmar? Or claims of massive election fraud and intercommunal violence in East Africa? Or the propagation of The Great Replacement rubbish that has led to numerous fat right terrorist atrocities.
Berenson by the way is a perfect case in point of someone (temporarily) banned from Twitter for posting out and out lies repeatedly, which will have led to more people dying than if he'd shut the f**k up.
Here's a thought experiment. During WWII, if a prominent celebrity had gone on the radio every night insisting that the blackout had no effect on the ability of Luftwaffe bombers to target their attacks, and that therefore it was fine to leave your windows uncovered, would you have defended their right to say what they wanted?
Yes I’ve heard that analogy. Agree to disagree on covid as we won’t get anywhere. A podcast I follow on Twitter got shadow banned for calling out gender ideology stuff btw.
This is about Twitter and it’s influence on western society. But I’d be interested to see where social media have propagated the Great Replacement Theory if you have links? Also please follow up on my other previous points regarding Trudeau and Hunter Biden story suppression.
Do you think people who openly espouse communist ideology on Twitter should be banned? They are on there.
-
Copernicus was THE textbook example of someone following the Scientific Method! He didn't decide that the earth went round the sun on a whim, with no evidence.
He didn't deliberately misrepresent all the evidence to the contrary and repeatedly lie about it.
Please tell me you're not trying to draw a line linking Copernicus and Berenson!
I’m not. I don’t necessarily agree with everything Berenson has said either, you just asked for an example.
Wasn’t Copernicus thrown in jail?
-
Another big moment that made people question the social media sponsored government narrative was when meeting up in lockdown was bad but BLM protests were fine.
Had it been anti-lockdown protests, they would have labelled granny killers and conspiracy theorists.
-
"Social media giants in recent years have seen themselves as the agents of social progress."
I'm sorry but this just takes the biscuit.
Have you not seen the way Facebook facilitated the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingia in Myanmar? Or claims of massive election fraud and intercommunal violence in East Africa? Or the propagation of The Great Replacement rubbish that has led to numerous fat right terrorist atrocities.
Berenson by the way is a perfect case in point of someone (temporarily) banned from Twitter for posting out and out lies repeatedly, which will have led to more people dying than if he'd shut the f**k up.
Here's a thought experiment. During WWII, if a prominent celebrity had gone on the radio every night insisting that the blackout had no effect on the ability of Luftwaffe bombers to target their attacks, and that therefore it was fine to leave your windows uncovered, would you have defended their right to say what they wanted?
Yes I’ve heard that analogy. Agree to disagree on covid as we won’t get anywhere. A podcast I follow on Twitter got shadow banned for calling out gender ideology stuff btw.
This is about Twitter and it’s influence on western society. But I’d be interested to see where social media have propagated the Great Replacement Theory if you have links? Also please follow up on my other previous points regarding Trudeau and Hunter Biden story suppression.
Do you think people who openly espouse communist ideology on Twitter should be banned? They are on there.
1) I'll repeat. Berenson did NOT get banned from Twitter for having an OPINION that was considered unacceptable. He was banned for repeatedly lying on matters of Objective Truth. You want to take this on with examples, I'm happy to.
2) Twitter has never "shadow banned" any account. You're repeating a conspiracy theory right here and now in this thread.
3) "Social media" doesn't propagate anything. People using it do.
Here's one example of a candidate for the US Congress openly applauding A Fox News presenter for supporting the Great Replacement Theory.
https://twitter.com/mattgaetz/status/1441807874053885952
4) No I don't think people should be banned for espousing Communism, any more than I think far-right activists should be banned for being far-right. Those are perfectly acceptable stances to take, even if I vehemently disagree with both. I think people should be barred from social media when they clearly and unarguably and repeatedly post lies and don't retract them. I'm talking about the sort that Berenson posted repeatedly, where he would, for example, quote a COVID study as having said X when the very authors of the study refuted that. That is precisely what my OP was about with respect to Musk promoting a clear and obvious lie (from a source which has previously claimed that Hillary Clinton died in 2016 and was replaced by a body double).
-
By the way Nc, your claim to be balanced and politically neutral has some work to do when you are posting stuff like this.
"the social media sponsored government narrative". What on earth is that supposed to mean?
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
Who’s joking about it?
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
I suspect you're wasting your time in trying to get Belton to engage on a substantive point Wilts. But good luck if you want to go down that rabbit hole. I stopped when I realised there was a common theme of him choosing to interpret everything I ever posted in the very worst possible light, start arguments based on that and then insist it was his right to do that. Looks like not much has changed in the 18 months since I stopped engaging with him.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
I suspect you're wasting your time in trying to get Belton to engage on a substantive point Wilts. But good luck if you want to go down that rabbit hole. I stopped when I realised there was a common theme of him choosing to interpret everything I ever posted in the very worst possible light, start arguments based on that and then insist it was his right to do that. Looks like not much has changed in the 18 months since I stopped engaging with him.
You are even counting the months, lol.
Here’s a thought for you, Billy: have a go at letting people decide things for themselves.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
I suspect you're wasting your time in trying to get Belton to engage on a substantive point Wilts. But good luck if you want to go down that rabbit hole. I stopped when I realised there was a common theme of him choosing to interpret everything I ever posted in the very worst possible light, start arguments based on that and then insist it was his right to do that. Looks like not much has changed in the 18 months since I stopped engaging with him.
To be honest my post was not really aimed at Belton. His post was just useful in me being able to make my point/set my argument by.
From memory I have had quite a few arguments with Belton, one or two heated, but we have always agreed to disagree amically in the end. I'm sure Belton will put me right if I am mistaken.
-
Wilts.
As you've probably noticed, I've had plenty of heated arguments myself. No problem with that.
My issue with Belton was his continued insistence over many months to read the very worst into everything I ever posted. Culminating in him bizarrely concluding that I was heaping abuse on a very dignified old man I'd heard on the radio mourning his wife who had died of COVID.
I've no idea why Belton did it. I asked him times without number to stop it, but he insisted it was his right to interpret my words how he chose.
You, quite literally, cannot argue with that. So I now ignore him, unless someone else quotes him. When, invariably he is having a dig at me.
It's really very sad.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
I suspect you're wasting your time in trying to get Belton to engage on a substantive point Wilts. But good luck if you want to go down that rabbit hole. I stopped when I realised there was a common theme of him choosing to interpret everything I ever posted in the very worst possible light, start arguments based on that and then insist it was his right to do that. Looks like not much has changed in the 18 months since I stopped engaging with him.
To be honest my post was not really aimed at Belton. His post was just useful in me being able to make my point/set my argument by.
From memory I have had quite a few arguments with Belton, one or two heated, but we have always agreed to disagree amically in the end. I'm sure Belton will put me right if I am mistaken.
Thank you, Wilts. I appreciate that you aren’t drawn into Billy’s attempt to force his opinion of me on everyone else.
Unfortunately for Billy, since he pretended to block me, the only way he can have another unnecessary pop at me without looking like a complete fool, is when someone else quotes me.
Invariably, as with you this evening, he does just that.
After 18 months (by Billy’s counting), he appears to have a bit of an obsession with me.
Back on topic, I don’t want hatred and lies spreading on any platform, by anyone, but it is impossible to police unless these platforms are closed to everyone.
-
Wilts.
As you've probably noticed, I've had plenty of heated arguments myself. No problem with that.
My issue with Belton was his continued insistence over many months to read the very worst into everything I ever posted. Culminating in him bizarrely concluding that I was heaping abuse on a very dignified old man I'd heard on the radio mourning his wife who had died of COVID.
I've no idea why Belton did it. I asked him times without number to stop it, but he insisted it was his right to interpret my words how he chose.
You, quite literally, cannot argue with that. So I now ignore him, unless someone else quotes him. When, invariably he is having a dig at me.
It's really very sad.
Billy, I have only ever commented on what you have written. You then always used the ‘I didn’t mean that’ but you keep on saying it.
As I remember, you used the poor man’s plight to have a go at, wait for it, the Tory government, yet he stood against everything you were banging on about at the time. It was shameful, indefensible behaviour and your only option to try to save face was to block me. The fact that your behaviour still bothers you is very telling.
If you really think that my posts are invariably about you, then you are even further up your own arse than I could ever imagine.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
Should you be allowed to influence people by knowing lying? Should you be allowed to use that influence you have gained by continualy lying to gain political power?
That's pretty much the argument here. For some people it's a joke. For others it's a murdered MP, an attempted coup or a petrol bomb at a refugee processing centre.
Coperincus was factually accurate due to his scientific observation. The women murdered in the Salem Witch Trials were victims of a greedy fellow villager wanting their land so making up stories about them that people belived.
There are many other stories from history of what happens when lies are allowed to become 'truth'.
I suspect you're wasting your time in trying to get Belton to engage on a substantive point Wilts. But good luck if you want to go down that rabbit hole. I stopped when I realised there was a common theme of him choosing to interpret everything I ever posted in the very worst possible light, start arguments based on that and then insist it was his right to do that. Looks like not much has changed in the 18 months since I stopped engaging with him.
To be honest my post was not really aimed at Belton. His post was just useful in me being able to make my point/set my argument by.
From memory I have had quite a few arguments with Belton, one or two heated, but we have always agreed to disagree amically in the end. I'm sure Belton will put me right if I am mistaken.
Thank you, Wilts. I appreciate that you aren’t drawn into Billy’s attempt to force his opinion of me on everyone else.
Unfortunately for Billy, since he pretended to block me, the only way he can have another unnecessary pop at me without looking like a complete fool, is when someone else quotes me.
Invariably, as with you this evening, he does just that.
After 18 months (by Billy’s counting), he appears to have a bit of an obsession with me.
Back on topic, I don’t want hatred and lies spreading on any platform, by anyone, but it is impossible to police unless these platforms are closed to everyone.
No problem Belton, as you know my opinions are my opinions, your interactions with Billy are between the two of you and absolutely nothing to do with the rest of us. Other than its boring as hell to read (with the greatest of respect to you both).
I disagree. Twitter 'police' their platform at the moment and dont allow people who break their rules to use it. Exactly the same as this forum. So clearly it can be done - because it is being done.
-
"Social media giants in recent years have seen themselves as the agents of social progress."
I'm sorry but this just takes the biscuit.
Have you not seen the way Facebook facilitated the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingia in Myanmar? Or claims of massive election fraud and intercommunal violence in East Africa? Or the propagation of The Great Replacement rubbish that has led to numerous fat right terrorist atrocities.
Berenson by the way is a perfect case in point of someone (temporarily) banned from Twitter for posting out and out lies repeatedly, which will have led to more people dying than if he'd shut the f**k up.
Here's a thought experiment. During WWII, if a prominent celebrity had gone on the radio every night insisting that the blackout had no effect on the ability of Luftwaffe bombers to target their attacks, and that therefore it was fine to leave your windows uncovered, would you have defended their right to say what they wanted?
Yes I’ve heard that analogy. Agree to disagree on covid as we won’t get anywhere. A podcast I follow on Twitter got shadow banned for calling out gender ideology stuff btw.
This is about Twitter and it’s influence on western society. But I’d be interested to see where social media have propagated the Great Replacement Theory if you have links? Also please follow up on my other previous points regarding Trudeau and Hunter Biden story suppression.
Do you think people who openly espouse communist ideology on Twitter should be banned? They are on there.
1) I'll repeat. Berenson did NOT get banned from Twitter for having an OPINION that was considered unacceptable. He was banned for repeatedly lying on matters of Objective Truth. You want to take this on with examples, I'm happy to.
2) Twitter has never "shadow banned" any account. You're repeating a conspiracy theory right here and now in this thread.
3) "Social media" doesn't propagate anything. People using it do.
Here's one example of a candidate for the US Congress openly applauding A Fox News presenter for supporting the Great Replacement Theory.
https://twitter.com/mattgaetz/status/1441807874053885952
4) No I don't think people should be banned for espousing Communism, any more than I think far-right activists should be banned for being far-right. Those are perfectly acceptable stances to take, even if I vehemently disagree with both. I think people should be barred from social media when they clearly and unarguably and repeatedly post lies and don't retract them. I'm talking about the sort that Berenson posted repeatedly, where he would, for example, quote a COVID study as having said X when the very authors of the study refuted that. That is precisely what my OP was about with respect to Musk promoting a clear and obvious lie (from a source which has previously claimed that Hillary Clinton died in 2016 and was replaced by a body double).
1) I’m not massively interested in him. Could that have been his interpretation of studies?
2) That’s up for debate really.
3) You said that social media propagated that theory so are you going against yourself now? That’s not Twitter / Facebook facilitating it as you claimed. As wrong as I think that is, it’s a theory, therefore it can’t be against Objective Truth.
4) Fair enough, I was seeing how far your bias stretched.
Wilts, by not silencing someone that isn’t allowing a lie to become truth. If a lie is so ridiculous such as the one BST pointed out with the nord stream then it won’t gain much traction, the majority will disagree and they’ll get ratio’d. If Twitter had removed “kimdotcom”s post he’d have said to his followers LOOK I WAS ON TO SOMETHING.
In terms of a social media sponsored government narrative, how about the point you keep ignoring? The hunter Biden laptop story was suppressed as it would have hurt Biden’s campaign. It was quickly labelled as “Russian disinformation” and you couldn’t even copy and paste the link to send. The story later turned out to be true. Stuff like this erodes people’s trust in mainstream media.
Another sponsored narrative would be the one that covid vaccines were necessary for everyone and stopped transmission when they hadn’t even been tested for that. Both went hand in hand is blowing the virus way out of proportion making young, healthy people think they could die from it. Debate regarding this was suppressed and came with Twitter warnings.( I’m not saying the vaccines didn’t do good by the way )
Also BST, did Trudeau go too far for you?
Because I’m not partisan to tories or Labour doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion on world events.
-
Good luck, nc, but I suspect that like most other posters who offer a well considered and strenuous opinion that may be different to Billy’s, you’ll get fed up of effectively being treated in such an obnoxious and condescending manner.
That, and the fact that no one else has the kind of time on their hands that Billy does.
I’m enjoying watching you give it a go, though.
All good natured. I just underestimated his ability to have an answer for everything!
-
"Social media giants in recent years have seen themselves as the agents of social progress."
I'm sorry but this just takes the biscuit.
Have you not seen the way Facebook facilitated the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingia in Myanmar? Or claims of massive election fraud and intercommunal violence in East Africa? Or the propagation of The Great Replacement rubbish that has led to numerous fat right terrorist atrocities.
Berenson by the way is a perfect case in point of someone (temporarily) banned from Twitter for posting out and out lies repeatedly, which will have led to more people dying than if he'd shut the f**k up.
Here's a thought experiment. During WWII, if a prominent celebrity had gone on the radio every night insisting that the blackout had no effect on the ability of Luftwaffe bombers to target their attacks, and that therefore it was fine to leave your windows uncovered, would you have defended their right to say what they wanted?
Yes I’ve heard that analogy. Agree to disagree on covid as we won’t get anywhere. A podcast I follow on Twitter got shadow banned for calling out gender ideology stuff btw.
This is about Twitter and it’s influence on western society. But I’d be interested to see where social media have propagated the Great Replacement Theory if you have links? Also please follow up on my other previous points regarding Trudeau and Hunter Biden story suppression.
Do you think people who openly espouse communist ideology on Twitter should be banned? They are on there.
1) I'll repeat. Berenson did NOT get banned from Twitter for having an OPINION that was considered unacceptable. He was banned for repeatedly lying on matters of Objective Truth. You want to take this on with examples, I'm happy to.
2) Twitter has never "shadow banned" any account. You're repeating a conspiracy theory right here and now in this thread.
3) "Social media" doesn't propagate anything. People using it do.
Here's one example of a candidate for the US Congress openly applauding A Fox News presenter for supporting the Great Replacement Theory.
https://twitter.com/mattgaetz/status/1441807874053885952
4) No I don't think people should be banned for espousing Communism, any more than I think far-right activists should be banned for being far-right. Those are perfectly acceptable stances to take, even if I vehemently disagree with both. I think people should be barred from social media when they clearly and unarguably and repeatedly post lies and don't retract them. I'm talking about the sort that Berenson posted repeatedly, where he would, for example, quote a COVID study as having said X when the very authors of the study refuted that. That is precisely what my OP was about with respect to Musk promoting a clear and obvious lie (from a source which has previously claimed that Hillary Clinton died in 2016 and was replaced by a body double).
1) I’m not massively interested in him. Could that have been his interpretation of studies?
2) That’s up for debate really.
3) You said that social media propagated that theory so are you going against yourself now? That’s not Twitter / Facebook facilitating it as you claimed. As wrong as I think that is, it’s a theory, therefore it can’t be against Objective Truth.
4) Fair enough, I was seeing how far your bias stretched.
Wilts, by not silencing someone that isn’t allowing a lie to become truth. If a lie is so ridiculous such as the one BST pointed out with the nord stream then it won’t gain much traction, the majority will disagree and they’ll get ratio’d. If Twitter had removed “kimdotcom”s post he’d have said to his followers LOOK I WAS ON TO SOMETHING.
In terms of a social media sponsored government narrative, how about the point you keep ignoring? The hunter Biden laptop story was suppressed as it would have hurt Biden’s campaign. It was quickly labelled as “Russian disinformation” and you couldn’t even copy and paste the link to send. The story later turned out to be true. Stuff like this erodes people’s trust in mainstream media.
Another sponsored narrative would be the one that covid vaccines were necessary for everyone and stopped transmission when they hadn’t even been tested for that. Both went hand in hand is blowing the virus way out of proportion making young, healthy people think they could die from it. Debate regarding this was suppressed and came with Twitter warnings.( I’m not saying the vaccines didn’t do good by the way )
Also BST, did Trudeau go too far for you?
Because I’m not partisan to tories or Labour doesn’t mean I can’t have an opinion on world events.
You suggested that social media platforms were left-leaning.
I said they had been used extensively to facilitate the propagation of far-right propaganda, including the Great Replacement theory.
I stand by what I said. Social media doesn't send a message. It facilitates users sending messages. There's no contradiction in anything I've said on that.
Regarding the Great Replacement Theory (sic), I don't think it comes remotely close to being justified in being thought of as a genuinely honest "theory". I also don't think it's tenets stand up to any assessment by the standards of Objective Truth. But that's entirely secondary to my specific point. Which was that Facebook and Twitter have allowed that propaganda to be propagated on their sites, even while it has been quoted by far right terrorists as justification for mass murders. Which kind of puts into question your assertion that these social media platforms are left leaning. A real criticism of them is that far too often they have been amoral. Accepting most content as long as it didn't harm their bottom line.
-
ncRover again that is not true. Some people like to believe a lie and the consequences for that are instability in society.
Take for example the Great Replacement Theory. Apparently the terrorist who firebombed the asylum centre believed in it, as did the Christchurch mosque killer and others. People on here have quoted it as have guests on national tv and radio - and they have been met with ridicule.
Most people who believe in it will do no harm to others. But others will commit murder - because they already have done.
Twitter flags this up as a fake theory. You propose to take that warning away and let an ideaology grow that is known to influence people to kill.
Free speech is never actually free.
-
Apologies to Billy - I must have been writing my response when he posted his. But its useful to see both posts I think - even on the same subject we have slightly different angles.
-
Yes I did say that in the last few years Twitter has been left-leaning. I gave examples of them actively interfering rather than a user just posting something (which you have done with the replacement theory) and you have ignored them. You’re trying to distract from my argument.
The page “Libs of TikTok” has also been banned previously. YouTube also removed in the past arguments against vaccine passports (defend anything here as going against Objective Truth
https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/2021/10/youtube-censors-david-davis-mps-speech-against-vaccine-passports/
-
Just a thought.
Do you know any prominent left-leaning social media users who deliberately pour out rivers of misinformation on Twitter?
Serious question.
-
Just a thought.
Do you know any prominent left-leaning social media users who deliberately pour out rivers of misinformation on Twitter?
Serious question.
You’re struggling to stay on course here BST. Please engage properly.
Yes. See my previous post on topics that are left leaning and questionable. I’m not saying that those on the right don’t - some very strange Ukraine takes for example.
I saw a viral tweet recently that said that Braverman and Patel wouldn’t have let their own parents in to the country.
Jess Phillips claimed Kwarteng lost the economy 65 billion. People say his mini-budget was an inside job so his mates could short the pound.
-
Remind me where you showed me examples of left leaning deliberate misinformation.
-
And perhaps, while we are talking about staying on course, given that you are insisting that social media has a left leaning bias, you could point me to examples of where there have been examples of social media being used by left-leaning people to organise genocide, disrupt elections and invite mass murders.
Just to keep this on course, you see?
Regarding David David, I'm not in favour as a rule of censoring MPs. I don't know what the circumstances of his speech being taken off YouTube. But he's on thin ice taking the moral high road, given his egregious lying over Brexit, discussed in some detail in here over the years.
-
Like I said, plenty of communists on Twitter and they killed millions and millions.
-
Just a thought.
Do you know any prominent left-leaning social media users who deliberately pour out rivers of misinformation on Twitter?
Serious question.
Russell Brand for one
-
Remind me where you showed me examples of left leaning deliberate misinformation.
#23 and more examples of questionable censorship / authoritarianism throughout the thread.
-
Nc.
See, this is where I'm struggling with you.
I'm talking about clear and unambiguous and deliberate and malicious spreading of things which are demonstrably false.
That list you gave is pretty much entirely "things which I, as a right-leaning person (which I would argue you clearly are) disagree with". For what it's worth I'll address every point in your #23 post, although quite frankly, none of them are really worth addressing in the context of what this thread was intended to be about - then I'm continuing with a particularly busy day at work.
1) I'm really not going down the trans rabbit hole, but I sense a very particular moral standpoint from your words. That's fine. You have the right to be disgusted by whatever you want. Just don't confuse your own prejudices with Objective Truth.
2) Masks DO reduce the transmission of COVID.
3) Vaccination DOES reduce the transmission of COVID. (PS: Forgive my tetchiness here, but I'm REALLY tired over how many times we went round this hamster wheel before you joined the discussion.)
4) Russia unquestionably DID materially help Trump defeat Clinton. They hacked emailsand passed them through Wikileaks into the public domain. Clinton's emails were a HUGE factor in the 2016 election. I really don't understand what point you are trying to make here.
5) Our very own Parliamentary Intelligence and Security Committee (chaired by a Tory MP, and with a majority of Tory MPs) has said there is very strong prima facie evidence for Russian interference in our elections. They expressed incredulity that Johnson's Government refused to hold a full investigation into the issue.
6) The NHS point is a political argument, not an issue of Objective Truth.
If these and the Hunter Biden (Jesus!) story are really what you're basing your case on, then we are clearly talking about very different things. So I'm going to politely wish you well and stop engaging, because there are only so many hours in the day.
-
Musk's a Kitson isn't he?
Looks like he's just cut a swathe through the Twitter moderation staff. And not even told them - just locked them out of their accounts and wiped their computers as they were sat working at them.
-
apparently musk is to sack everyone and run it from his phone
-
apparently musk is to sack everyone and run it from his phone
7000 were sacked today , unlawfully as it happens , he's not followed the correct procedures according to US Federal Law .
7000 law suits coming his way , not that he can't afford it mind .
Deleted my account as of today .
-
Apparently in the technical department he sacked the least productive staff first.
That is, he sacked the most experinced staff who were working on the most difficult, complex issues and kept the least experienced who had been given lots of easy stuff to do.
And this bloke is taking people to the moon!!!
-
an entity without checks and balances run on the whim of the ceo ....... hmmmm
-
This policy looks like it’s backfiring on him. Many big name sponsors are suspending or pulling out their interest in Twitter. Many of the staff that worked as moderators have been laid off and most of the staff used to sort the algorithms out. So there is every chance Twitter will become a much more rogue social media platform without moderation. Then there is the suggested cost of using it for those that choose to. I can see the general public that use this shifting to another platform.
-
I agree with normal. At the moment all that Musk looks like doing is putting 4chan (other non-moderated fascist forums are available) out of business as its users move over and everyone else leaves.
Mastodon is the one the music people I follow are moving to, if anyone is interested.
-
I'm out the minute they say you have to pay
-
Apparently in the technical department he sacked the least productive staff first.
That is, he sacked the most experinced staff who were working on the most difficult, complex issues and kept the least experienced who had been given lots of easy stuff to do.
And this bloke is taking people to the moon!!!
To be specific, he sacked the staff based on the amount of code they've written. He sacked the ones who wrote the least code.
Anyone with even a basic knowledge of coding will tell you how stupid this is. Often the best coding is about doing what you need to in as few lines as possible. If you can delete 50 lines of code and do the job by writing one, you're probably a great coder. The guy is a clown, and a deeply stupid person. The more control he has over a project, the worse it tends to get. And he's got total control over Twitter now.
-
I agree with normal. At the moment all that Musk looks like doing is putting 4chan (other non-moderated fascist forums are available) out of business as its users move over and everyone else leaves.
Mastodon is the one the music people I follow are moving to, if anyone is interested.
Sounds like Mastodon is struggling to cope with the migration to their app.
-
Mastodon here we come !
-
Musk running Twitter is like a hyperactive kid being given a tank.
https://mobile.twitter.com/hyperplanes/status/1590389219280633856
-
Has Mastadon taken over yet then? It’s way below Twitter on the app charts
-
He's...he's just a big f**king kid running round pressing buttons isn't he?
https://mobile.twitter.com/CCSewell/status/1592257949971673088
-
I hope the thing collapses I have never used it and won't miss it?
-
Sproty.
It's nothing but a form of communication. It has some people communicating lies. It has some people communicating brilliant ideas. It has some people communicating pointless guff.
It's a reflection of humanity.
It can be a great benefit to the world. Or it can be deliberately used to f**k everything over.
What Musk is doing is diving in and dicking about with it because he's like a kid trying out his authority.
If it collapses, something will replace it.
Because there are people who want to communicate brilliant ideas, people who want to communicate lies and people who want to communicate meaningless guff.
You use this place. In many ways it's just a tiny version of Twitter. You get what you want out of it. By not using Twitter, you're just staying in a tiny corner of the world.
-
I would bet you a lot of money that it isn’t overtaken by a similar app in the next 5 years.
-
Sproty.
It's nothing but a form of communication. It has some people communicating lies. It has some people communicating brilliant ideas. It has some people communicating pointless guff.
It's a reflection of humanity.
It can be a great benefit to the world. Or it can be deliberately used to f**k everything over.
What Musk is doing is diving in and dicking about with it because he's like a kid trying out his authority.
If it collapses, something will replace it.
Because there are people who want to communicate brilliant ideas, people who want to communicate lies and people who want to communicate meaningless guff.
You use this place. In many ways it's just a tiny version of Twitter. You get what you want out of it. By not using Twitter, you're just staying in a tiny corner of the world.
I live without ‘guff’ & lies very happily.
As for brilliance, true brilliance will shine out with or without twitter.
If not having (or having never had) a twitter account truly leaves me in just a ‘tiny corner of the world’ (which I take exception to even though th slight wasn’t actually directed at me) then I can live with that.
-
I don't have an active Twitter account either. I use Twitter to listen to some absolute geniuses in various fields. I've learned things I could never have begin to imagine. It's a true privilege.
I don't get the prickly insularity of some folk on this issue.
-
Wont be long now it seems:
I was laid off from Twitter this afternoon. I was in charge of managing badge access to Twitter offices.
Elon just called me and asked if I could come back to help them regain access to HQ as they shut off all badges and accidentally locked themselves out.
https://twitter.com/anothercohen/status/1593404311832338442
-
Wont be long now it seems:
I was laid off from Twitter this afternoon. I was in charge of managing badge access to Twitter offices.
Elon just called me and asked if I could come back to help them regain access to HQ as they shut off all badges and accidentally locked themselves out.
https://twitter.com/anothercohen/status/1593404311832338442
This is actually not quite true, this guy is joking, or shitposting in twitter lingo. However they have locked their offices because of musk's bone headed decision to send out an email to all staff basically asking them to click an opt in link to continue working there. He said doing so would need them to be "hardcore".
Unsurprisingly most staff did not engage with this, with around 75% of current staff expected to leave as a result. Having that much of your workforce effectively resign at once means they aren't able to keep track who actually still works there and they need the weekend to figure it out.
Arguably that's worse that what you posted because it means there aren't enough staff to fix things if they break and the site could fall over at any time.
-
Wont be long now it seems:
I was laid off from Twitter this afternoon. I was in charge of managing badge access to Twitter offices.
Elon just called me and asked if I could come back to help them regain access to HQ as they shut off all badges and accidentally locked themselves out.
https://twitter.com/anothercohen/status/1593404311832338442
This is actually not quite true, this guy is joking, or shitposting in twitter lingo. However they have locked their offices because of musk's bone headed decision to send out an email to all staff basically asking them to click an opt in link to continue working there. He said doing so would need them to be "hardcore".
Unsurprisingly most staff did not engage with this, with around 75% of current staff expected to leave as a result. Having that much of your workforce effectively resign at once means they aren't able to keep track who actually still works there and they need the weekend to figure it out.
Arguably that's worse that what you posted because it means there aren't enough staff to fix things if they break and the site could fall over at any time.
Thanks Macho. That will teach me to repost things before checking. (reader - no it wont).
-
Don't blame you to be honest wilts - one of the big problems since Musk took over is knowing what's true or not on the platform.
End of an era for Twitter, sadly.
-
Wont be long now it seems:
I was laid off from Twitter this afternoon. I was in charge of managing badge access to Twitter offices.
Elon just called me and asked if I could come back to help them regain access to HQ as they shut off all badges and accidentally locked themselves out.
https://twitter.com/anothercohen/status/1593404311832338442
This is actually not quite true, this guy is joking, or shitposting in twitter lingo. However they have locked their offices because of musk's bone headed decision to send out an email to all staff basically asking them to click an opt in link to continue working there. He said doing so would need them to be "hardcore".
Unsurprisingly most staff did not engage with this, with around 75% of current staff expected to leave as a result. Having that much of your workforce effectively resign at once means they aren't able to keep track who actually still works there and they need the weekend to figure it out.
Arguably that's worse that what you posted because it means there aren't enough staff to fix things if they break and the site could fall over at any time.
Thanks Macho. That will teach me to repost things before checking. (reader - no it wont).
The gullible are easily taken in, eh Wilts!
-
So now he's reinstated Trump on Twitter after running a poll, after which he crowed "The people have spoken".
A poll where Musk has no idea if the accounts that voted are real or fake. No idea if they are based in Virginia or Vladivostok.
He really is a f**king bored child playing with matches.
-
So now he's reinstated Trump on Twitter after running a poll, after which he crowed "The people have spoken".
A poll where Musk has no idea if the accounts that voted are real or fake. No idea if they are based in Virginia or Vladivostok.
He really is a f**king bored child playing with matches.
Perhaps the owner of Tesla and SpaceX actually knows what he’s doing?
-
So now he's reinstated Trump on Twitter after running a poll, after which he crowed "The people have spoken".
A poll where Musk has no idea if the accounts that voted are real or fake. No idea if they are based in Virginia or Vladivostok.
He really is a f**king bored child playing with matches.
Perhaps the owner of Tesla and SpaceX actually knows what he’s doing?
You can be very qualified and able in one field but poor in another though.
-
Why exactly should a man who invested in an electric car company have any more idea than the rest of us how to deal with a would-be dictator?
-
Why exactly should a man who invested in an electric car company have any more idea than the rest of us how to deal with a would-be dictator?
He’s running a business and is obviously rather good at it.
-
And that's all Twitter is? A business? No social responsibility?
-
Why is it wrong to allow D Trump to return to twitter. 15,000,000 people voted the majority wanting him reinstated
-
Trump has repeatedly said he doesn't want to return to twitter as he has his own social media platform. Why do some people wish him to become a hypocrite?
-
Why is it wrong to allow D Trump to return to twitter. 15,000,000 people voted the majority wanting him reinstated
1) Who were they?
2) He was banned for inciting an attempted coup at which a number of people died. Is that now just a "meh" thing?
-
But they thought they were voting for Daniel Trump from Nantucket
-
Why is it wrong to allow D Trump to return to twitter. 15,000,000 people voted the majority wanting him reinstated
cos amongst other things he suggests people inject themselves with bleach phil
-
BST and Syd. I’m not saying I agree with some of his actions or comments. I’m just pointing out he has a right to a voice.
Would you ban the likes of Tony Blair and George Bush who lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction and took the west into a war that has cost
Millions of lives. Would you ban the extinction rebellion for their behaviour of inciting riots that deliberately endangers people. Would you ban J Corbyn who has openly stood alongside terrorist in their support.
Where is the line drawn
-
where is the line drawn ........ hmmm ....... woke people? ......... magistrates you don't agree with .......... anti-establishment people?............. but don't whatever you do criticise the police.
-
BST and Syd. I’m not saying I agree with some of his actions or comments. I’m just pointing out he has a right to a voice.
Would you ban the likes of Tony Blair and George Bush who lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction and took the west into a war that has cost
Millions of lives. Would you ban the extinction rebellion for their behaviour of inciting riots that deliberately endangers people. Would you ban J Corbyn who has openly stood alongside terrorist in their support.
Where is the line drawn
I'd say it's a very tricky line to draw. Absolute free speech is not a good thing, the freedom to spout racism and incite hatred and violence are freedoms we can do without.
This causes a tremendous challenge for Twitter, when realistically they have a small team of kids trying to police such a vast platform and when interpretation can be very nuanced.
It looks to me like Elon has spent billions on a platform that will always struggle to be profitable. Which is why he seems to be keen to add lots of new features to monetise the platform that get away from its core service.
-
Trump has repeatedly said he doesn't want to return to twitter as he has his own social media platform. Why do some people wish him to become a hypocrite?
Become a hypocrite? Think you're way behind the curve there, Wilts.
-
Twitter boss Elon Musk keeps conspiracy theorist Alex Jones off platform https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63701423
Now this the type of idiot that needs banning
-
And that's all Twitter is? A business? No social responsibility?
A social responsibility for free speech.
-
And that's all Twitter is? A business? No social responsibility?
Elon Musk (sounds like a Star Wars character doesn't it?) is discovering pure free speech is not desirable. Much as he would like to not have to pay for people to police his platform
A social responsibility for free speech.
-
And that's all Twitter is? A business? No social responsibility?
A social responsibility for free speech.
Yes of course. Or do you think free speech comes with no social responsibility?
-
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394?s=46&t=koWTHl8n7hlNkcDs4tm39A
-
And that's all Twitter is? A business? No social responsibility?
A social responsibility for free speech.
Yes of course. Or do you think free speech comes with no social responsibility?
It's happening. Right in front of our eyes.
Musk has just restored the Twitter account of the editor of the fascist conspiracy site The Daily Stormer. A man who is on record saying he hates women and they should be beaten, raped and kept in cages.
Free speech comes without social responsibility eh?
-
BST who is this person and what has he actually said about women.
I’ve Never heard of the Daily Stormer.
-
If only an engine where you could search the internet existed. They could even call it a search engine. You know, where you could put in something like "editor of Daily Stormer".
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=editor+of+daily+stormer
Ah, neo-Nazis.
-
Phil.
Google Andrew Anglin
YOU may never have heard of him. Plenty of people who he has trolled and abused have heard of him. Including one Jewish American woman who he attacked for years. The court who fined him $14m for this has heard of him
YOU might never have heard of him. That's not the point. The point is that Musk has decided that a fascist with a record of abusive action should have the right to spew his hate all over Twitter.
-
Genuine question, guys. Why isn't this pr*ck, Anglin, in prison?
-
And that's all Twitter is? A business? No social responsibility?
A social responsibility for free speech.
Yes of course. Or do you think free speech comes with no social responsibility?
It's happening. Right in front of our eyes.
Musk has just restored the Twitter account of the editor of the fascist conspiracy site The Daily Stormer. A man who is on record saying he hates women and they should be beaten, raped and kept in cages.
Free speech comes without social responsibility eh?
Have you not got anything to say about the Twitter thread I linked above?
Imagine if Donald Trump Jr had been found to be a crack and prostitute user and have shady dealings with foreign countries just before the election. And then, a biased Twitter suppressed this story so as to not harm Trump’s election chances. You would rightly be outraged, wouldn’t you?
Also, is it your view that an individual can be moralistic without religion? I would guess that your answer would be yes to that. So why, do you think that every aspect of dangerous speech should to be censored, as if people would just blindly follow it?
I too have never heard of the Daily Stormer. But I have heard of Kanye West, and he has had his account suspended.
-
Agreed ncRover. Imagine if Joe Biden had taken highly classified secret documents to his private residence in a breach of national security, putting hundreds, if not thousands of US operatives at personal risk - you would be perfectly correct to castigate him and Musk for censoring this story as you do in the post above.
Oohhh...
-
I'd say it's a very tricky line to draw. Absolute free speech is not a good thing, the freedom to spout racism and incite hatred and violence are freedoms we can do without.
This causes a tremendous challenge for Twitter, when realistically they have a small team of kids trying to police such a vast platform and when interpretation can be very nuanced.
It's societies responsibility through our democratically elected governments to draw the line. We have laws on what constitutes hate speech or incitement to violence. It's these laws Twitter (and other social media platforms) should be duty bound to follow.
I agree this causes an issue giving the scale of the platform.
Twitter should not be giving a platform to individuals that have been prosecuted for contravening these laws in the past.
The other problem with social media isn't around Freedom of Speech but it's twin ideal of Right to Reply. On social media users form opinion bubbles where those with similar views congregate.
Publicly stating whether in the street or on Twitter that the Covid vaccines are useless is within someone's rights of Freedom of Speech and is not a contravention of any law.
Say that on the street and a huge number people are able to contradict you with evidence. Say it to thousands in your opinion bubble on social media, where the right-thinking majority will never see it to argue against, and it may cause societal damage.
Twitter may be a boon to Freedom of Speech but it causes dangers by restricting the Right to Reply.
-
Agreed ncRover. Imagine if Joe Biden had taken highly classified secret documents to his private residence in a breach of national security, putting hundreds, if not thousands of US operatives at personal risk - you would be perfectly correct to castigate him and Musk for censoring this story as you do in the post above.
Oohhh...
If this is about Trump, where exactly have I shown any support for that man? I do not like him at all, but he is not the topic of conversation here.
I believe in democracy and free speech.
-
Maybe Musk should be concentrating on getting shit disinformation like this off Twitter, rather than enabling fascist conspiracy theorists.
https://twitter.com/FubsyShabaroon/status/1599834974039031860?s=20&t=Xq1CmGQ_svkwslX3ICyYuw
-
Billy just doobother with it , musk will soon be bankrupt financially as well as morally
-
Billy just doobother with it , musk will soon be bankrupt financially as well as morally
That's a bit like saying "Don't bother with words".
Twitter is a tool of communication. Properly managed, it can be (and in many ways, still is) a massive benefit to humanity.
Abused, it is a massive threat to the concept of Objective Truth.
Musk has sacked hundreds of staff whose job it was to root out disinformation like the shit I posted earlier. Because he's got f**k all interest in protecting Objective Truth. His obsession is giving a free soapbox to far right lie peddlers. Because it drives clicks and therefore income.
And yes, I AM obsessive about the importance of Objective Truth. It comes from devouring every work by George Orwell in my youth. Because he understood more than anyone the pit of Hell you stumbled into if you lost that hold on Truth. This was one of his best assessments. He's talking about the Nazis of the 30s and 40s, but the fascists of today have learned the same methods for attacking the Truth. That's why the idea of a President of America blithely dismissing anything he didn't like as "fake news", and tens of millions of people still supporting him is THE most terrifying development of this century. Closely followed by us electing a pathological liar as PM, and 100 Tory MPs still supporting him after his lies had been exposed.
Anyway. Here's Orwell.
"I know it is the fashion to say that most of recorded history is lies anyway. I am willing to believe that history is for the most part inaccurate and biased, but what is peculiar to our own age is the abandonment of the idea that history could be truthfully written. In the past, people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously colored what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that “the facts” existed and were more or less discoverable. And in practice there was always a considerable body of fact which would have been agreed to by almost anyone. If you look up the history of the last war in, for instance, the Encyclopedia Britannica, you will find that a respectable amount of the material is drawn from German sources. A British and a German historian would disagree deeply on many things, even on fundamentals, but there would still be a body of, as it were, neutral fact on which neither would seriously challenge the other. It is just this common basis of agreement with its implication that human beings are all one species of animal, that totalitarianism destroys. Nazi theory indeed specifically denies that such a thing as “the truth” exists. There is, for instance, no such thing as “Science”. There is only “German Science,” “Jewish Science,” etc. The implied objective of this line of thought is a nightmare world in which the Leader, or some ruling clique, controls not only the future but the past. If the Leader says of such and such an event, “It never happened” — well, it never happened. If he says that two and two are five — well two and two are five. This prospect frightens me much more than bombs — and after our experiences of the last few years that is not such a frivolous statement."
-
And so it goes on.
https://twitter.com/ariehkovler/status/1600607644640808985?s=20&t=YBxi-HMFvQPrKB9AWcEvDA
That's Roger Stone who was banned from Twitter for repeatedly sending abusive messages to journalists. That's Roger Stone who was given a 3.5 year sentence for perjury and witness tampering in the Trump investigations, before being pardoned by Trump. That's Roger Stone who encouraged the attempted coup at Congress.
Musk is giving a platform to conspiracy theorists like this who have actively worked to undermine democracy.
Because free speech comes with no responsibility.
-
And so it goes on.
https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesClayton5/status/1600619990691954688
The man is f**king unhinged. Driving staff so hard they need beds in their office so they don't have to go home between shifts.
-
Co-ordinated bot attacks are not a new thing to Twitter you know. He’s going to work to get rid of as many bots as possible.
Also this https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1599142189124096000?s=46&t=uAAFWKc2PVej3GPFM50hvg
Also still no comment regarding the Twitter files release BST. I’m interested to hear what you think of that. Basically proves me right when you said previously there was no evidence or that it was up for debate.
-
1) I'm simply not engaging on "the Twitter Files" because it is b*llocks
It's a non-story that throws absolutely no light whatsoever on a subject that obsessed far-right conspiracy theorists, but which has precisely zero substance. The Twitter Files is a non-story pushed bus hack who needs to keep himself seeming relevant. The fact that YOU apply so much credibility to it, if I may speak bluntly, indicates that you have a limited set of sources. Look around a bit and you will find numerous critiques from very respected sources that explain in detail why "The Twitter Files" is a nothingburger.
"The Twitter Files" prove precisely zero about whether the laptop story has any substance. It is simply about how Twitter reacted to the STORY about the laptop in the final stages of an election campaign."
Even Tucket Carson said it was no smoking gun. Even Seb Gorka said he was "underwhelmed" by the Twitter Files. Do you think you maybe are reading more into this than really exists?
2) If Twitter is doing better at dealing with child exploitation, that's genuinely great. I'd like to see the actual source of that claim though, and can't help but be suspicious that it dropped immediately after Twitter was getting negative press for massive staff cuts in the team dealing with child exploitation accounts. I'd be very happy for my scepticism to be proved wrong.
3) I get that coordinated bot attacks aren't new. I'd prefer it if he concentrated more on that issue and less on reopening the accounts of fascists and criminals.
-
“B*llocks” “non-story” “nothingburger” = I can’t defend my point of view so I’ll just ignore it.
It’s not the be all and end all for me, no. And just because it gets the attention more from a certain type of person doesn’t make what happened any less credible.
I don’t have a limited set of resources, I follow all types of people on Twitter. In doing so, that helps me to see the double standards of those who are politically partisan.
I just find it interesting that you want to clamp down on disinformation and be the purveyor of truth, but somehow think what Twitter did there was ok (or do you not?).
Like I’ve put to you to above; how would you feel if all of this was happening in political reverse? I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be a “nothingburger” for you in that instance.
Anyway, you said shadow-banning was a conspiracy theory. https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601007575633305600?s=46&t=jXuvpvCctPRgEFwNu80BEg
-
Amazing how often I hear this from people on the far right.
"How would YOU feel if people on the Left were engaged in massive, systematic disinformation and deception, and planning to undermine democracy, and action was taken against them?"
-
Amazing how often I hear this from people on the far right.
"How would YOU feel if people on the Left were engaged in massive, systematic disinformation and deception, and planning to undermine democracy, and action was taken against them?"
The attempted publishing of the Hunter Biden story was not “undermining democracy”.
I’m not far right but whatever keep ignoring my points, says a lot.
-
Nc.
1) Absolutely, the publication of a conspiracy theory with no substance, aimed at smearing a candidate in the immediate run up to an election is undermining democracy. What do you consider it to be? Value-neutral free speech? And what do you consider the examples below to be?
2) "Shadow banning" as I understand it, is blocking someone from a platform without them knowing. This is the first definition that Google offers "block (a user) from a social media site or online forum without their knowledge, typically by making their posts and comments no longer visible to other users. There is zero evidence of that happening." There is zero evidence of that happening in the link you posted, despite what the writer claims. Twitter was choosing not to amplify the conspiracy theorists who were hysterically claiming that the 2020 election had been illegally stolen (a line that led directly to an attempted coup by crazed far-right activists, drunk on that narrative). Twitter didn't block the tweets of Bongino or Kirk, or anyone else. They just chose, responsibly in my opinion, not to push them.
By the way, I really shouldn't have to say this, but if there were left wing people actively trying to undermine the democratic process by a concerted misinformation campaign that incited an attempt to murder leading right wing politicians whle they were trying to carry out their duties, I'd be horrified by any organisation pushing their message a value-neutral free speech.
The point is that there simply AREN'T influential individuals on the Left doing that. Whereas there ARE numerous ones on the Right. Maybe you could give us your take on why their right to do that is so precious?
3) You keep insisting that you aren't far right, yet you keep pushing themes that are heavily peddled by the far right. You posted a line that even people as far to the Right as Tucker Carlson and Sebastian Gorka have dismissed as nothing, but then you took me to task for dismissing it. You previously told me Matteo Salvini was a centrist. If you'll excuse me, I'll form my judgements based on the content of what you post, rather than what you claim to be.
-
2) "Shadow banning" as I understand it, is blocking someone from a platform without them knowing. This is the first definition that Google offers "block (a user) from a social media site or online forum without their knowledge, typically by making their posts and comments no longer visible to other users. There is zero evidence of that happening." There is zero evidence of that happening in the link you posted, despite what the writer claims. Twitter was choosing not to amplify the conspiracy theorists who were hysterically claiming that the 2020 election had been illegally stolen (a line that led directly to an attempted coup by crazed far-right activists, drunk on that narrative). Twitter didn't block the tweets of Bongino or Kirk, or anyone else. They just chose, responsibly in my opinion, not to push them.
FWIW Seth Abramson, left leaning curatorial journalist and normally the most careful of Twitter users when it comes to having evidence of events/issues when posting, and author of 3 books with more footnotes and references than I have ever seen, is now claiming he was shadow banned on Twitter in 2020
-
Nc.
1) Absolutely, the publication of a conspiracy theory with no substance, aimed at smearing a candidate in the immediate run up to an election is undermining democracy. What do you consider it to be? Value-neutral free speech? And what do you consider the examples below to be?
2) "Shadow banning" as I understand it, is blocking someone from a platform without them knowing. This is the first definition that Google offers "block (a user) from a social media site or online forum without their knowledge, typically by making their posts and comments no longer visible to other users. There is zero evidence of that happening." There is zero evidence of that happening in the link you posted, despite what the writer claims. Twitter was choosing not to amplify the conspiracy theorists who were hysterically claiming that the 2020 election had been illegally stolen (a line that led directly to an attempted coup by crazed far-right activists, drunk on that narrative). Twitter didn't block the tweets of Bongino or Kirk, or anyone else. They just chose, responsibly in my opinion, not to push them.
By the way, I really shouldn't have to say this, but if there were left wing people actively trying to undermine the democratic process by a concerted misinformation campaign that incited an attempt to murder leading right wing politicians whle they were trying to carry out their duties, I'd be horrified by any organisation pushing their message a value-neutral free speech.
The point is that there simply AREN'T influential individuals on the Left doing that. Whereas there ARE numerous ones on the Right. Maybe you could give us your take on why their right to do that is so precious?
3) You keep insisting that you aren't far right, yet you keep pushing themes that are heavily peddled by the far right. You posted a line that even people as far to the Right as Tucker Carlson and Sebastian Gorka have dismissed as nothing, but then you took me to task for dismissing it. You previously told me Matteo Salvini was a centrist. If you'll excuse me, I'll form my judgements based on the content of what you post, rather than what you claim to be.
I saw a report that quoted his party as centre-right and used that for balance because the ultra-progressives tend to label a lot of things as far-right that they disagree with. Perhaps he is, I don’t know? If we discuss things we get closer to the truth.
I’m pro-immigration and pro-Ukraine. Things that the far-right are not. So don’t try to smear me like that when you’re struggling in an argument please. I try to keep it otherwise good-natured.
-
Nc.
If you're reading reports that sat Salvini is centre-Right, and not seeing anything that says he is far-right, that kind of buttresses the point I was making earlier about the balance of what you read.
I hear what you are saying about your own self-assessment, but you have, uncritically posted several themes that are pushed very hard by the far-right.
-
Nc.
If you're reading reports that sat Salvini is centre-Right, and not seeing anything that says he is far-right, that kind of buttresses the point I was making earlier about the balance of what you read.
I hear what you are saying about your own self-assessment, but you have, uncritically posted several themes that are pushed very hard by the far-right.
The far-right will be annoyed that Alex Jones and Kanye West are not allowed on Twitter.
Ok I’m pretty sure it was a mainstream site but fair enough. I also think the anti-authoritarian values I have are old-school left. But the political spectrum is ever changing.
I’m also pro-abortion rights, support the right of workers to strike and am for the decriminalisation of drugs… If I was far-right that also wouldn’t be the case.
You shouldn’t think “is this argument a left wing or right wing one?” before deciding to agree / disagree with it.
-
Today Musk has banned a bunch of journalists who were covering him, seemingly for no reason. He also banned Mastodon, and the account that covered the (publicly available) flight tracking of his private jet after saying he wouldn't.
Wonder when he'll be releasing the Twitter files on this.
It's really not that deep - he's a fragile manbaby who's fallen into a far right echo chamber because they lick his arse.
-
he's a fragile manbaby who's fallen into a far right echo chamber because they lick his arse.
This, in spades.
-
Aaaaannnddd..
He's been threatened by the EU and UN and he's given in and reinstated those journalists.
He's like a hyperactive kid with a Fisher Price Activity Centre. "Ooh! Ooh! Look at the noise it makes when I hit that green button! I wonder what it'll do if I smash the red button with a big f**king hammer?"
Beta testing on a live system. Let's f**k about with this aspect of Twitter and see what effect it has.
Doesn't give you much confidence in his cars or his rockets does it, if those companies are run as chaotically as he's running Twitter.
-
Remember reading a post from someone who claimed to have worked at SpaceX. Now, this is a completely unsourced, anonymous report but I have no problem believing it. Besides, if Elon has no problem sharing unverified hearsay on his platform, why should anyone else? I've pasted it below. Regardless, it doesn't sound like he wants to stick it out much longer. He's f**ked it so dramatically and publicly he's cratered Tesla stock and has put up a poll asking if he should step down. The man is a clown.
I was an intern at SpaceX years ago, back it when it was a much smaller company — after Elon got hair plugs, but before his cult of personality was in full swing. I have some insight to offer here.
Back when I was at SpaceX, Elon was basically a child king. He was an important figurehead who provided the company with the money, power, and PR, but he didn’t have the knowledge or (frankly) maturity to handle day-to-day decision making and everyone knew that. He was surrounded by people whose job was, essentially, to manipulate him into making good decisions.
Managing Elon was a huge part of the company culture. Even I, as a lowly intern, would hear people talking about it openly in meetings. People knew how to present ideas in a way that would resonate with him, they knew how to creatively reinterpret (or ignore) his many insane demands, and they even knew how to “stage manage” parts of the physical office space so that it would appeal to Elon.
The funniest example of “stage management” I can remember is this dude on the IT security team. He had a script running in a terminal on one of his monitors that would output random garbage, Matrix-style, so that it always looked like he was doing Important Computer Things to anyone who walked by his desk. Second funniest was all the people I saw playing WoW at their desks after ~5pm, who did it in the office just to give the appearance that they were working late.
People were willing to do that at SpaceX because Elon was giving them the money (and hype) to get into outer space, a mission people cared deeply about. The company also grew with and around Elon. There were layers of management between individual employees and Elon, and those managers were experienced managers of Elon. Again, I cannot stress enough how much of the company culture was oriented around managing this one guy.
Twitter has neither of those things going for it. There is no company culture or internal structure around the problem of managing Elon Musk, and I think for the first time we’re seeing what happens when people actually take that man seriously and at face value. Worse, they’re doing this little experiment after this man has had decades of success at companies that dedicate significant resources to protecting themselves from him, and he’s too narcissistic to realize it.
This post is long so I’ll leave you with my favorite Elon story. One day at work, I got an all hands email telling me that it was Elon’s birthday and there was going to be a mandatory surprise party for him in the cafeteria. Presumably Elon also got this email, but whatever. We all marched down into the cafeteria, dimmed the lights, and waited. Elon was led out by his secretary (who he hadn’t fired yet) and made a big show of being fake surprised and touched that we were there. Then they wheeled out the cake.
OK, so, I want you to imagine the biggest penis cake you’ve ever seen. Like the king of novelty sex cakes. Only it’s frosted white, and the balls have been frosted to look like fire and smoke. This was Elon’s birthday “rocket” cake.
For as long as I live, I will never forget the look on everyone’s face — in that dark room of mostly-male engineers — when he made a wish and cut into the tip.
-
https://news.sky.com/story/elon-musk-asks-twitter-users-if-he-should-step-down-as-boss-of-social-media-site-12771044
Asks users via Twitter Poll, whether he should step down as CEO.
Says he will abide by the results of the poll.
Poll starts going against him.
Issues a *Be careful what you wish for’ warning lol.
What a baby.
-
Vox populi, vox dei.
As some bell end on Twitter keeps saying.
-
$44 billion he paid for twitter and now he doesn't want to run it. And people trust him to send them into space - good luck on that.
-
Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?
-
Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?
Like he did over that vote about reinstating Trump, eh?
-
Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?
Like he did over that vote about reinstating Trump, eh?
I was just posing a question, nothing else.
-
And I'm just pointing out the inconsistency if that's was what he was doing.
-
So Musk lost his "who likes me?" poll but is breaking his promise to step down.
But when a poll voted to restore Trump's Twitter account, he said it was the Will of the People.
He's a bit of a tit isn't he?
-
Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?
Could be he is just a narcistic egotistic with more money than sense?
I see very little evidence for your theory - but quite a lot to back up mine.
-
Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?
Could be he is just a narcistic egotistic with more money than sense?
I see very little evidence for your theory - but quite a lot to back up mine.
Not really a theory, was just a question. I can't stand the Kitson to be honest, controlled opposition.
-
Sounded like he was encouraged to take more of a back seat at Twitter by the execs at Tesla because their own stocks have been tanking over the last few weeks.
-
Sounded like he was encouraged to take more of a back seat at Twitter by the execs at Tesla because their own stocks have been tanking over the last few weeks.
Certainly have. Down from $309 in Sept to $137 today. I heard an investor on the radio on Monday saying it was because Tesla doesn't have a functioning CEO, because Musk is indulging his inner man-child on Lib-baiting on Twitter.
-
Its always been the case that "freaks of nature" like Musk need careful handling, these types tend to crash and burn if they don't have strong background mentors, board or executive to control their "negative aspects"
With the correct people around them they can be a force for good, in this case its proving quite difficult and possibly terminal for both him and his organisations, with all the ramifications to follow.
IF, he's clever enough and the spectrum urges are tamed and managed then some good may appear from the chaos.
-
Sounded like he was encouraged to take more of a back seat at Twitter by the execs at Tesla because their own stocks have been tanking over the last few weeks.
Certainly have. Down from $309 in Sept to $137 today. I heard an investor on the radio on Monday saying it was because Tesla doesn't have a functioning CEO, because Musk is indulging his inner man-child on Lib-baiting on Twitter.
Now down to $122 dollars. 60% drop in Tesla share price since the man-child started demonstrating to the world on a daily basis what goes on in his head.
-
Like a hyperactive f**king teenager.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1610416059940495363?s=20&t=1SaWTacqHX-9-xZ2CFtHIg
What a d**khead.
-
Glad I sold out my Tesla shares when I did. Won't be touching that with a barge pole again for a while.
-
Re-tweeting anti-Semitic alt-right shite today.
He's either so stupid he doesn't realise how stupid he is. Or he's deliberately doing this.
-
I wonder.
Is THIS the reason Musk has thrown in his lot with the batshit Right?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64293744
He could lose most of what is left of his fortune over this.
I wonder if he's trying to re-cast himself as the darling of the batshit right, so that he's got political protection if the Republicans win the Presidency next year? Maybe a way of insulating himself against these losses.
-
The prick is at it again, spreading Russian propaganda.
https://mobile.twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1622511780399312896
-
How’s Mastodon doing in relation to Twitter nowadays then?
-
Looks like he's doing his best to finally kill twitter off. Used to think he was shrewd, becoming to wonder...
-
He's playing at being powerful. He's a funking idiot who has struck lucky in the past but who is making what should be the greatest communication tool humanity has ever produces into an impending disaster.
-
I don’t understand why it’s fashionable to want to see him fail.
Twitter has grown as a platform and I think improved since he came in. There was an outcry at him cutting 50% of staff but it obviously didn’t need them all.
He’s also purged the platform of bots. Which is a good thing, no?
The fact-checking “community notes” is balanced and appears on all sorts of misleading tweets from across the political spectrum. Even though you claimed there was no such thing as left-wing disinformation, BST. 1 example:
https://twitter.com/jwsal/status/1669280472667488256?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
All of the things people hysterically said would happen haven’t (the platform and society turning in to a racist, sexist, extremist hellhole and getting overtaken by Mastadon). And the reaction to this is hysterical because it’s cool to hate on Elon.
We can revisit this thread in a few months when Twitter is absolutely fine again. Had something like this happened a few years ago people would have just been like “oh a technical issue” and not thought anything of it.
-
What has he done to Twitter this time?
On hols so off it till I get home
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
Whenever people post links to Twitter I am now unable to read them, whereas in the past I could do.
Do I now need a Twitter account to be able to read stuff that has been posted on there?
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
Whenever people post links to Twitter I am now unable to read them, whereas in the past I could do.
Do I now need a Twitter account to be able to read stuff that has been posted on there?
For those that cannot access the link this is a copy of the tweet
Some people asked me to share what I just shared in a space about the rate limits. I don't work for Twitter but, I do architect IT cloud solutions as my day job.
It is temporary. Twitter's rate limiting is not what everyone is thinking it is. It is not to punish non-paying users.
"Data scraping" is a big deal. This is where automated systems load the website or app and pull your tweets/data. It's a huge security issue. Automated systems are pulling every tweet/word/user account information to store in an unknown database somewhere else.
This could be state actors like China, the US Government, Australia, or other bad political actors like PAC's that are trying to gain access to everyone's information to analyze and use for nefarious things. Manipulating what is said on the site can be done at scale with data scrapping.
It could also be used to figure out the identity of Anons or to punish people in their country for what they tweet. Looking at you #Australia and #Canada and #UnitedKingdom
The temporary measures of limiting tweets is to protect users just as much as it is to protect the entire Twitter network from going down. They are currently scrambling to get ahead of this and tune their network security to block it from happening again.
It's also important to note that twitter has 500,000+ servers. That's not free. In cloud data centers, the companies that use them have to pay for what is called "ingress and egress" of data going "in and out" of the servers. A data scrapping event that is large enough for them to start limiting means that it was a MASSIVE event that could be considered an attack on the site. It would also put massive load on their servers and cost them so much money it could threaten the site's financial ability to keep running. It could be on purpose to put twitter out of business from cost alone.
Many people are misunderstanding why @elonmusk wants people to pay for twitter or for the twitter API (a programming interface that can pull data for other sites and apps).
The reason he wants people to pay is because if China or porn companies want to create massive bot farms of fake accounts, it is currently free. These bad actors are highly skilled and operate like a business. They have professional staff that continuously change their tactics and Twitter engineers have to fight 24/7 to stay ahead of them. If they have to pay for every account or pay to use the API, it would cost them A LOT of money. This limits the amount of people who could create bots, put automated porn on here, and the hacking/scrapping/DDOS attacks on the site. It protects you.
It also guarantees twitter will continue to exist without bloating it with tons of ads. This is all a part of the plan to create a free-speech place we can enjoy without being controlled by outside actors or advertising companies. I know $8 is a lot to some people but, it is for many reasons. None of the reasons are to hurt or punish people.
#TwitterDown #TwitterLimits #SolutionsArchitect #CloudSecurity #FreeSpeech
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
Must just be a coincidence how Musk suddenly prioritises protections against data scraping on the very day that Twitter's contract with Google Cloud expires...
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
Must just be a coincidence how Musk suddenly prioritises protections against data scraping on the very day that Twitter's contract with Google Cloud expires...
Article from June 21st
https://www.reuters.com/technology/twitter-resumes-paying-google-cloud-bloomberg-news-2023-06-21/
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
Must just be a coincidence how Musk suddenly prioritises protections against data scraping on the very day that Twitter's contract with Google Cloud expires...
Article from June 21st
https://www.reuters.com/technology/twitter-resumes-paying-google-cloud-bloomberg-news-2023-06-21/
Does that have anything to do with the contract ending?
-
NC I agree it's a bit of a thing to want him to fail. But restricting it's usage to the general population removes the one strong usp it has - mass, realistic information. Take that away there isn't a product.
are you saying its restricted to the general population in this temporary moment or in general?
https://twitter.com/misteryrobozo/status/1675217396670291971?s=46&t=Uj9lS9cW2ksdznjWwHqrkQ
Must just be a coincidence how Musk suddenly prioritises protections against data scraping on the very day that Twitter's contract with Google Cloud expires...
Article from June 21st
https://www.reuters.com/technology/twitter-resumes-paying-google-cloud-bloomberg-news-2023-06-21/
Does that have anything to do with the contract ending?
Yes the contract is getting paid, you’ve been done by some misinformation it would seem Billy.
It was reported the contract was going to end 30/06/23 due to unpaid bills earlier this month potentially causing platform instability.
Bloomberg reported on 21/06/23
“Twitter has resumed paying Google Cloud for its services, patching up a relationship that became strained after Elon Musk acquired the social network and stopped paying Google and various other companies”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-06-21/twitter-resumes-paying-google-cloud-patching-up-relationship?utm_medium=social&cmpid%3D=socialflow-twitter-tech&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic&utm_content=tech&sref=10lNAhZ9#xj4y7vzkg
-
It was reported the contract was going to end 30/06/23 due to unpaid bills earlier this month potentially causing platform instability.
That's not correct. The contract was up for renewal on 30 June. That renewal date was contractually fixed a long time ago and has nothing to do with Twitter paying or not paying Google earlier last month.
-
Bloody hell you struggle so much to admit when you’re wrong it’s a bit scary.
Ok, you prove that this problem is due to Twitter not paying Google. Even though I’ve given you evidence that they are paying them again prior to the date of the contract renewal from numerous sources including Bloomberg and Reuters.
There’s another article here from a tech writer along with the previous one underneath.
https://www.engadget.com/twitter-has-supposedly-started-paying-its-google-cloud-bill-again-213824844.html?guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLnVrLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAGKNEvZBaor8RNCLmmACqTFH4G8PxM1YWaQQVvaJqIlpu3QYEzV0_haKSnN1kW0nHL6Hh1umvF5uxfDF_Ly7X09uyCUrFlP3OP7V0cRQFEv8uYXr6lpEj_VfXV_hG3FwOApaLMW-JEDp2ZTJXRoLjgOiN5k2PkU7oyFP7Lw5t5Gn
-
If Musk is concerned about 'data-scraping' surely he would prioritise the people who pay him money in limiting the amount of info they put out there so it doesn't get swept? But he appears to be putting them at more risk by allowing them more tweets?
As for the he has paid the contract with Google and there is nothing to worry about - why has he been trying to move off Google Cloud?
Twitter signed a contract with Google in 2018 and expanded its GCP footprint in 2021. Twitter was reportedly due to pay Google some $300 million in 2023, as part of a multi-year deal worth around $1 billion, that was up for renewal at the end of June.
Reports said Google could not get through to Musk to discuss the unpaid bills, and went as far as attempting to reach him through his other firm, SpaceX, also a GCP customer.
Twitter has reportedly been ‘scrambling’ to cut costs by moving services off Google Cloud before the contract ends on June 30, but this process was taking longer than expected. Systems under threat of being cut off included those dedicated to fighting spam and removing content featuring child sexual abuse, extremism, and gore.
The Information previously reported that the company has been seeking to renegotiate its contract with Google in recent months, following similar renegotiation attempts with Amazon and Oracle last year.
Since he took over Twitter for $44 billion last year, Elon Musk has been looking to reduce the company’s IT footprint and costs, by reducing both cloud and on-premises IT resources.
The company has closed one of its three US data centers and reportedly exited another – with Musk’s other company Tesla taking vacated space in at least one of the sites. It has also cut back on server capacity, and fired IT and software workers that kept the service online.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/twitter-pays-google-cloud-bill-fixes-relationship-report/
-
Bloody hell you struggle so much to admit when you’re wrong it’s a bit scary.
Ok, you prove that this problem is due to Twitter not paying Google. Even though I’ve given you evidence that they are paying them again prior to the date of the contract renewal from numerous sources including Bloomberg and Reuters.
There’s another article here from a tech writer along with the previous one underneath.
https://www.engadget.com/twitter-has-supposedly-started-paying-its-google-cloud-bill-again-213824844.html?guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLnVrLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAGKNEvZBaor8RNCLmmACqTFH4G8PxM1YWaQQVvaJqIlpu3QYEzV0_haKSnN1kW0nHL6Hh1umvF5uxfDF_Ly7X09uyCUrFlP3OP7V0cRQFEv8uYXr6lpEj_VfXV_hG3FwOApaLMW-JEDp2ZTJXRoLjgOiN5k2PkU7oyFP7Lw5t5Gn
Has the contract been renewed from 1st July?
-
NC
I'm really not sure what part of this you are struggling with. Take a big deep breath and think about what we know.
1) The contract was always up for renewal on 30 June.
2) Yes, Twitter stopped paying earlier in June. The contract end date wasn't caused by this. Quite possibly it was a negotiating tactic. We don't know.
3) Apparently Twitter started paying again about a fortnight ago. That doesn't change the fact that the contract was up for renewal on 30 June.
Do you disagree with any of that?
If not, please rein in the insults.
-
I wouldn’t say that was an insult.
No but then it literally says in that last link:
“Twitter has resumed paying its Google Cloud contract, according to Bloomberg.”
Why would the contract not get renewed by Google if Twitter were paying it again?
-
Do you really need me to explain the logic again?
Twitter was in a contract until 30 June. They were contractually obliged to pay until at least 30 June.
They stopped and then re-started paying in mid June.
None of that changes the fact that the contract was due to end on 30 June.
I really don't understand what you're not getting here.
-
Baffling how anyone can say new Twitter is good. Functionally it is clearly falling to bits, with no end of bugs on show. I've personally seen video playback errors, content not loading, blocking and following bugs, I couldn't see quote tweets at all for a while. Others have reported being unable to send DMs. Now we have Tweet rations, and everything Musk has said or done since taking charge proves he doesn't have a clue.
Boosting of paid blue ticks means that absolute f**king idiots - which you categorically are if you're paying for a blue tick - can artifically boost their reach, so interesting posts are buried beneath crypto scammers, Elon fanboys, spam bots, and a sprinkling of Nazis for good measure. Not to mention the epidemic of animal abuse videos posted under popular threads, which don't get removed for ages as the genius in charge fired most of the moderation team.
It's basically descending into a far right echo chamber, where the guy who runs the place shares conspiracy theories from white nationalists and launches Republican presidential campaign bids while still claiming to be politically neutral.
The reason the rate limit is needed is down to a rushed update the dipshit pushed out that forces people to log in to read tweets, by the way. It's sending too many requests to get data and DDOSing itself, which is normally something that malicious hackers to to crash a website.
-
Every time I go on Twitter lately, I'm bombarded by adverts for illegal telescopic batons and hugh powered catapults.
I can't decide whether Musk is a negligent big kid indulging his ego, or something far darker and more dangerous. But either way, it's insane that he's allowed to own and run this platform.
-
MM.
This, from a very smart Twitter user is an interesting take.
https://twitter.com/t0nyyates/status/1675987412973961217?s=20
As he says, it's contentious and his own opinion, but a lot of it fits with the facts over the past year.
-
Musk and Zuckerberg.
Owners of two dangerously powerful communications systems.
Having a public argument about whether they will have a cage fight.
f**k me it's like the entire world is in a script that was rejected for Black Mirror.
-
Well that made me laugh BST but it says something about today’s world that people like this are so powerful.
-
It does Idler. A pair of narcissistic kids with fragile egos.
-
Musk is slowly destroying Twitter.
He decimated the team that watched over hate speech and banned accounts. Just this week there have been complaints submitted about accounts with names that are variants of "gasthejews" and they've all been rejected, with Twitter saying there's no reason to ban the accounts.
So most Blue chip companies have withdrawn their advertising accounts - who wants to see adverts for their products in threads promoting genocide?
As a result, the actual adverts have become weirder. They used to be adverts for cheap trainers and stay-pressed shirts.
Then they morphed into adverts for lethal weapons.
Now I'm bombarded with adverts that claim to be BBC reports on the theme "People horrified by how he made his money" splattered across pictures of Chris Packham. Which turn out to be promoting scam cryptocurrency websites.
What an almighty f**k up.
-
If it’s a f**k up that sees the demise of Twitter, then surely that’s a good thing.
-
Oh yeah. And in other news, it turns out Musk is running his own, private foreign policy.
Musk who has repeatedly called for the theft of land in the Russian invasion to be accepted as a fact, blocked Ukraine from using Starlink to support an attack on Russia's Black Sea fleet. That left the Russian ships free to lob missiles into Ukrainian city centres.
-
If it’s a f**k up that sees the demise of Twitter, then surely that’s a good thing.
No. Twitter is potentially one of the greatest things that humanity has ever produced. It allows communication on a scale never known before.
Personally I've found it wonderful to be able to tap in real time into the minds of genuine experts on topics that I'm interested in, either professionally or personally.
The fact thatvit can also be used to spread hatred and deliberate disinformation is a reflection on the standards and morals of some parts of humanity. But you don't deal with that by cutting everyone off.
-
If it’s a f**k up that sees the demise of Twitter, then surely that’s a good thing.
No. Twitter is potentially one of the greatest things that humanity has ever produced. It allows communication on a scale never known before.
Personally I've found it wonderful to be able to tap in real time into the minds of genuine experts on topics that I'm interested in, either professionally or personally.
The fact thatvit can also be used to spread hatred and deliberate disinformation is a reflection on the standards and morals of some parts of humanity. But you don't deal with that by cutting everyone off.
That’s impossible to police. There are too many people in the world with terrible standards and morals, I’m afraid. And too many people who think those people should have their say.
-
Some interesting insights into the Musk ............
''Who or what is to blame for Elon Musk? Famed biographer of intellectually muscular men Walter Isaacson’s dull, insight-free doorstop of a book casts a wide but porous net in search of an answer. Throughout the tome, Musk’s confidantes, co-workers, ex-wives and girlfriends present a DSM-5’s worth of psychiatric and other theories for the “demon moods” that darken the lives of his subordinates, and increasingly the rest of us, among them bipolar disorder, OCD, and the form of autism formerly known as Asperger’s. But the idea that any of these conditions are what makes Musk an “asshole” (another frequently used descriptor of him in the book), while also making him successful in his many pursuits, is an insult to all those affected by them who manage to change the world without leaving a trail of wounded people, failing social networks and general despair behind them. The answer then must lie elsewhere''
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/sep/13/elon-musk-by-walter-isaacson-review-arrested-development
-
https://twitter.com/michaelsobolik/status/1701926222962266341
This is like listening to a really poor A level student trying to form coherent thoughts.
But there's one thing consistent with him. He pushes Putin's line. He pushes Xi's line.
-
https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1703539315907645599/photo/1
f**k me. Full on anti-semitism. What a Kitson.
-
Musk has just reinstated the Twitter accounts of Katie Hopkins and Yaxley- Lennon, both of whom were banned for abusive postings.
It appears that Musk has done this after a few far right posters asked him to reinstate the two banned accounts.
Great, eh?
-
I have started using X but I am surprised at how many blatantly racist and sexist posts are on there!
-
It's fast becoming a cesspit.
The business model relies on people paying $8/month for premium accounts. Those people get their tweets pushed up the feed. It's quite clear that this has been hijacked by bits and organised hate groups paying this small sum to amplify their hate speech and make Twitter either unusable, or actively dangerous through normalising/pushing that sort of abuse.
It fits the FSB playbook. It's a cheap and effective way to totally f**k up reasonable democratic discussion and information flow.
The question is, is Musk complicit in that, or is he f**king thick beyond words and not understanding what he is doing?
-
Going well isn't it?
Musk can't stop posting genuinely disgusting anti-Semitic tropes. He's got major advertisers leaving Twitter faster than rats off a sinking ship.
-
Regarding his approval of the antisemitism there's no defence. But the advertisers boycotting because apparently there's loads of nazi ads has been exposed as lefties faking news. His tweet gives details of the anaylsis X has done of their algos into what Media Matters actually did to basically falsify news. The nasty nasties strike again
https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/elon-musk-suing-media-matters-advertising-x-twitter-ads-nazi-white-pride-1235798786/
-
Regarding his approval of the antisemitism there's no defence. But the advertisers boycotting because apparently there's loads of nazi ads has been exposed as lefties faking news. His tweet gives details of the anaylsis X has done of their algos into what Media Matters actually did to basically falsify news. The nasty nasties strike again
https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/elon-musk-suing-media-matters-advertising-x-twitter-ads-nazi-white-pride-1235798786/
Let's get this right.
A man with a long track record of pushing car right views says his platform doesn't push far right views?
And you take that as case closed?
-
Regarding his approval of the antisemitism there's no defence. But the advertisers boycotting because apparently there's loads of nazi ads has been exposed as lefties faking news. His tweet gives details of the anaylsis X has done of their algos into what Media Matters actually did to basically falsify news. The nasty nasties strike again
https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/elon-musk-suing-media-matters-advertising-x-twitter-ads-nazi-white-pride-1235798786/
Let's get this right.
A man with a long track record of pushing car right views says his platform doesn't push far right views?
And you take that as case closed?
Freudian.....
-
The man is f**king unhinged. He's now spreading the Pizzagate conspiracy.
-
Ok. He's ready to be sectioned.
https://twitter.com/AlexThomp/status/1729996181756129724
Picture it.
You are such a narcissist that you spend $44bn to buy the greatest communication system that humankind has ever produced, in order to make your voice louder.
But your voice can't stop saying disgusting things. Because you are a disgusting human.
And then you find that the companies who made the business model of your communications platform work, don't want to be associated with the disgusting things you and your friends say.
So what do you do?
By the look of it, you get shitfaced and go out in public telling those companies to go f**k themselves.
He's unraveling in public.
-
He's a Kitson. Openly embracing the alt-right poster boy thing now, because it's all he's capable of.
Although it's quite funny to read the CEO of Twitter, who Musk hired specifically to woo advertisers, write about how welcoming the platform is to advertisers, while linking to the interview where Musk tells advertisers to f**k off:
https://twitter.com/lindayaX/status/1730088124615631060