Homesteading Forum banner
101 - 120 of 242 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #101 ·
Some of these moves are defensible; others are not. But no matter what Musk does, people seem hellbent on crying catastrophe. For instance, a lot of folks are now insisting that Musk's Twitter has become a haven for racism.

Much of this stems from a report that "use of N-word on Twitter jumped by almost 500% after Elon Musk's takeover." But the jump seems to have come from a coordinated attempt by trolls to test limits, not some sort of new normal on the platform.

And other attempts to portray Twitter as newly toxic ring hollow, considering offensive language and conspiracy theories thrived on the site long before Musk took over, and that Musk insisted (at least as of late last week) that no content moderation changes had yet been made.

Overall, it smacks of people just looking for reasons to pillory Musk.

 

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #105 ·
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY is quietly broadening its efforts to curb speech it considers dangerous, an investigation by The Intercept has found. Years of internal DHS memos, emails, and documents — obtained via leaks and an ongoing lawsuit, as well as public documents — illustrate an expansive effort by the agency to influence tech platforms.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #106 ·
That article explains why the world has turned on Musk.

He may die soon.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #107 ·
Prior to the 2020 election, tech companies including Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, Discord, Wikipedia, Microsoft, LinkedIn, and Verizon Media met on a monthly basis with the FBI, CISA, and other government representatives. According to NBC News, the meetings were part of an initiative, still ongoing, between the private sector and government to discuss how firms would handle misinformation during the election.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CC Pereira

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #108 ·
I can't take credit for saying it, but I will share it

Lift weights, eat clean, learn to negotiate, learn survival skills, self reflect, make babies and home school. Only way we get out of this mess, boys. - Anonymous
 

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #110 ·
I am not sure if Musk has figured out what he is doing. He keeps implementing a policy and then backtracking on it within hours .
Maybe he is figuring out what he is doing
 

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #112 ·

· Sock puppet reinstated
Joined
·
28,928 Posts
After seeing the mistakes made this week by Elon with regards to Twitter I don't believe we will see the "free speech" free for all that he wanted it to be. The advertisers won't return.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
44,068 Posts
Discussion Starter · #117 ·
After seeing the mistakes made this week by Elon with regards to Twitter I don't believe we will see the "free speech" free for all that he wanted it to be. The advertisers won't return.
The dust will settle.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
10,488 Posts
Yes, lots of people paid that 8.00 fee to pretend they were someone else.
Interesting that you’ve adopted the CNN narrative on the $8 blue check marks. Color me shocked!

No one can pay $8 to pretend they’re someone else. That’s not how it works. In the olden days, the long-long-ago, blue check marks were given to signify that someone’s account had been vetted as legitimate, and the identity proven by Twitter’s researchers. The verification was free, and all you had to do was apply for it… and be selected by Twitter’s researchers for validation.

Many, many people applied for a blue check mark but were never selected for validation because they didn’t toe the CNN-party line or were otherwise deemed deplorable. This is what Elon’s $8 fee addresses. Anyone, of any political persuasion can now request validation and, after having their identity confirmed (and paying their $8 fee to cover the research) get their blue check mark.

That’s what has CNN so upset. Now, even deplorables can have their accounts validated via the same research that was used to previously confirm only good comrades.

There was recently a hilarious dust-up over the matter that had the Tinmen losing their minds. CNN issued the narrative that the new system meant that anyone could pay $8 for a blue check on any account, even a stolen identity (never minding the facts of how a blue check is issued). So, doing her duty as one of your fellow Tinmen, Cathy Griffen changed her name to Elon Musk, used his avatar, and started posting a bunch of stuff that made him look bad.

The Tinmen claimed that this proved their narrative and, when Twitter banned Kathy Griffen’s account, also claimed that this proved that Elon Musk was willing to censor unflattering speech.

Of course, the whole thing was hilariously ironic because (don’t expect CNN to tell you this part) one of the existing rules of blue check marks was that you couldn’t change your name from the one that twitter’s research team had researched and validated and, if you did, you would be banned for it. So, Kathy Griffen inadvertently proved CNN’s narrative wrong.

Nothing has changed in the blue check mark system other than that conservatives are now eligible to receive them, and everyone who requests use of Twitter’s resources to confirm their identity has to pay an $8 monthly fee.

And, here we find ourselves, with you dutifully repeating CNN’s blatant gas-lighting of Elon Musk because he’s been placed into the basket of deplorables, and is now a subject of your Two Minutes Hate
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,913 Posts
After seeing the mistakes made this week by Elon with regards to Twitter I don't believe we will see the "free speech" free for all that he wanted it to be. The advertisers won't return.
This kind of thing is what the late evening news casts up here were about last night:

.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,013 Posts
101 - 120 of 242 Posts
Top