Elon Musk

[Branton Red]

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.

[ncRover]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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

[Sprotyrover]

Billy just doobother with it , musk will soon be bankrupt financially as well as morally

[BillyStubbsTears]

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."

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[ncRover]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[ncRover]

“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

[BillyStubbsTears]

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?"

[ncRover]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[Dutch Uncle]

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   

[ncRover]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[ncRover]

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.

[MachoMadness]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

he's a fragile manbaby who's fallen into a far right echo chamber because they lick his arse.

This, in spades.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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.

[MachoMadness]

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.

[mugnapper]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Vox populi, vox dei.

As some bell end on Twitter keeps saying.

[wilts rover]

$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.

[Nudga]

Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?

[BillyStubbsTears]

Could it be that he's mining the bots and weeding them out?

Like he did over that vote about reinstating Trump, eh?

[Nudga]

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.

[BillyStubbsTears]

And I'm just pointing out the inconsistency if that's was what he was doing.

[BillyStubbsTears]

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?

[wilts rover]

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.