1 1
brenthutch

Big changes for Twitter

Recommended Posts

(edited)
23 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

https://apnews.com/article/elon-musk-twitter-inc-technology-social-media-1a9005b6653b07b5764ed61053554d1f

Musk looking at 75% staff reduction.

Fewer gatekeepers = more free speech, IMHO, a good thing.

I'm thinking you don't have any IMHO's.

Edited by JoeWeber
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, wmw999 said:

What do you consider to be free speech? Do you include bullying, doxing, and the like?

Wendy P. 

Sure it does, as long as the correct people are chosen. Seems to me that announcing that 75% of the work force is scheduled for the guillotine might just inspire a few Twitter Nutters with options to look past the stock price and more towards suddenly being opposed to the sale. If so, it's a brilliant play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

What do you consider to be free speech? 

Wendy P. 

Being able to discuss the business dealings of the First Family, the origins of covid, the efficacy of vaccines, and the security of our election systems to name a few.  Not allowing questions to be asked, brings up even more questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Being able to discuss the business dealings of the First Family, the origins of covid, the efficacy of vaccines, and the security of our election systems to name a few.  Not allowing questions to be asked, brings up even more questions.

Excellent. Now in addition to all else you're an election denier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Fewer gatekeepers = more free speech, IMHO, a good thing.

Don't think you are very clear on the concept of free speech.  Free speech is not "the government should force Facebook to carry any messages I want for free."

And in any case, fewer gatekeepers = more automated processes that reject posts if they see keywords.  Try arguing with an algorithm.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, billvon said:

Don't think you are very clear on the concept of free speech.  Free speech is not "the government should force Facebook to carry any messages I want for free."

And in any case, fewer gatekeepers = more automated processes that reject posts if they see keywords.  Try arguing with an algorithm.

Who said anything about Facebook?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Musk looking at 75% staff reduction.

Fewer gatekeepers = more free speech, IMHO, a good thing.

It is mind boggling that you think those two things are related. Though I’m not surprised to see you celebrating mass job losses. 
 

If it happens of course - Elon Musk says a lot of shit and a lot of it is bullshit. Enjoy the infestation of spambots if it does happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
6 hours ago, brenthutch said:

Being able to discuss the business dealings of the First Family, the origins of covid, the efficacy of vaccines, and the security of our election systems to name a few.  Not allowing questions to be asked, brings up even more questions.

I see those being discussed on twitter all the time.

However, I don't understand how you can argue that a baker should be allowed to refuse to bake cakes for gay people, but Twitter is not allowed to moderate content?

Edited by SkyDekker
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

....Fewer gatekeepers = more free speech, IMHO, a good thing.

Does this mean that you and Slim have finally found a home? To voice your opinions unhindered by "time outs" from overbearing moderators?

We will all miss you both:`( .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Maybe someone should found a Twitter for conspiracy theorists. Call it TwitterCon or something like that.

Wendy P. 

TwitterCon doesn’t really roll off the tongue. What about ‘Truth Social’?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(edited)
5 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

I see those being discussed on twitter all the time.

However, I don't understand how you can argue that a baker should be allowed to refuse to bake cakes for gay people, but Twitter is not allowed to moderate content?

A transaction should be amenable to both parties, there are plenty of other bakeries that would be glad to have that business. 
BTW Twitter is allowed to put its finger on the scales of social    media just as much as Musk will now be able to do now.

”Inside every progressive is a totalitarian just waiting to get out”

Edited by brenthutch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

A transaction should be amenable to both parties, there are plenty of other bakeries that would be glad to have that business.

Maybe. But what if the couple needed to travel 1000 miles or pay a $1000 premium as a penalty, would you still feel the same?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1