NFR Twitter

[Rob Allen]

I dunno about free speech. But I can tell you one thing. I am sick to death of websites that are jumpy and do not work or are confusing because of advertising. You know what? I am just sick of advertising. I'm almost as sick of advertising as I am sick of my own need to respond to everything stimulates a negative response from my brain.

 

[creekx]

Careful what you wish for ...

Stating that legacy media hate free speech is moronic and without evidence, and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the First Amendment - what bumper sticker did you read that on?

Careful what you wish for? Like free exchange of ideas? Sure, legacy media might not hate ALL free speech - just speech that doesn't comply with the preferred narrative. The way they reflexively circled the wagons over this Musk/Twitter news makes all of this self-evident.

Funny, they have no problem with some billionaires owning other news/media corporations. Wonder why that is?

 

[Evan B]

I dunno about free speech. But I can tell you one thing. I am sick to death of websites that are jumpy and do not work or are confusing because of advertising. You know what? I am just sick of advertising. I'm almost as sick of advertising as I am sick of my own need to respond to everything stimulates a negative response from my brain.

Install uBlock Origin on your browser. It'll help you a bunch in that regard.

 

[krusty]

I dunno about free speech. But I can tell you one thing. I am sick to death of websites that are jumpy and do not work or are confusing because of advertising. You know what? I am just sick of advertising. I'm almost as sick of advertising as I am sick of my own need to respond to everything stimulates a negative response from my brain.

I'm pretty good about being able to ignore advertising and simply stop visiting websites when it becomes a technical problem.

I think the real problem with all social media websites is that they provide continous and unparalleled opportunities to get aggravated about all sorts of things....far beyond what most of us would experience absent exposure to such material. It also provides an opportunity for individuals who are energized and entertained by conflict and provocation. It often presents itself as legitimate discourse when, in fact, it's just somebody who delights in pissing others off. We've all worked with such people.

 

[Dustin Chromers]

Careful what you wish for? Like free exchange of ideas? Sure, legacy media might not hate ALL free speech - just speech that doesn't comply with the preferred narrative. The way they reflexively circled the wagons over this Musk/Twitter news makes all of this self-evident.

Funny, they have no problem with some billionaires owning other news/media corporations. Wonder why that is?

View attachment 12066

Banning hate speech is allot different than simply banning speech you hate. It's sad it even needs to be said especially for the "read the amendment, it doesn't work like that!" crowd.

Remember when you could invite whoever you wanted to speak at a college campus? Maybe even an edgy and hip comedian? Today's college set is more vanilla than their fifties conservative era grandparents remember. You know, the folks that college kids refer to as fascists these days. Sure the ideas are different but the policing of them is far more fervent. Free speech is dead in the college campus. Yes, I said it. It's f...cking dead. It was killed by an ever so tolerant "progressive" class that was nourished on the idea that any challenge or discomfort to their ideas was to be attacked and expelled as something not permitted. Many students now "feel" deplatforming someone is a legitimate tactic. That in itself wouldn't be so scary as I've met some pretty idiotic college kids but a large swath of the American public feels this way as well. What happened? Well it's a long story but in essence the college kids are all growed up chronologically and in actual positions of influence. It's too bad their critical reasoning, logic, and philosophy teachings haven't grown with the years of experience. When ignorance and stupidity is rewarded it multiplies and propagates.

 

[Evan B]

I'm pretty good about being able to ignore advertising and simply stop visiting websites when it becomes a technical problem.

I think the real problem with all social media websites is that they provide continous and unparalleled opportunities to get aggravated about all sorts of things....far beyond what most of us would experience absent exposure to such material. It also provides an opportunity for individuals who are energized and entertained by conflict and provocation. It often presents itself as legitimate discourse when, in fact, it's just somebody who delights in passing others off. We've all worked with such people.

This pretty much sums it up. The internet provided opportunities for certain ideas that used to exist in isolation to unite and have a platform. Paired up with a 24hr news cycle, it's a bad recipe. There's no better way to bring people together than to create enemies, and these outlets do that extraordinarily well.

I see it in some close family members in very profound ways. People who 20+yrs ago never had a problem with anyone, and just lived their life and had no problems. Now the same folks spend a LOT of time and energy complaining and raging about people and cultures they've never encountered, live far away from, and can go on living their life without even noticing their existence.... Yet these "others" are now occupying their minds and energies on a constant basis. It's scary to see how effective this is.

 

[Mossback]

Having an 'outrage du jour' is essential for a lot of folks...after all with so much to be outraged about, being able to move from one outrage to another is important when it comes to maintaining a high level of outrage.

Fauxrage, it's all the rage.

 

[cody-]

This is your champion of free speech?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[Canuck from Kansas]

Careful what you wish for? Like free exchange of ideas? Sure, legacy media might not hate ALL free speech - just speech that doesn't comply with the preferred narrative. The way they reflexively circled the wagons over this Musk/Twitter news makes all of this self-evident.

Funny, they have no problem with some billionaires owning other news/media corporations. Wonder why that is?

View attachment 12066

So let me get this straight, you believe legacy media blocks the free exchange of ideas - where is it written that media has an obligation to provide every Tom, Dick and Harriet with a megaphone? It is certainly not in the first amendment. Furthermore, not sure any legacy media, or any media has blocked the free exchange of ideas, would be interested in any data, information you have on this. Has the media blocked you from going to the town square, blocked you from voting, writing your congressperson, etc. Colour me skeptical.

cheers

 

[Dustin Chromers]

This is your champion of free speech?

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Did you know in China is illegal to disparage a Chinese company?

 

[Dustin Chromers]

So let me get this straight, you believe legacy media blocks the free exchange of ideas - where is it written that media has an obligation to provide every Tom, Dick and Harriet with a megaphone? It is certainly not in the first amendment. Furthermore, not sure any legacy media, or any media has blocked the free exchange of ideas, would be interested in any data, information you have on this. Has the media blocked you from going to the town square, blocked you from voting, writing your congressperson, etc. Colour me skeptical.

cheers

You don't have a platform with legacy media or on par with them. That's why this whole thing is even a thing. Twitter allows anybody to have a megaphone, even Putin. Well almost anybody anyway.

Local news is dead. Your beloved legacy media made certain of that. Colour me skeptical when basically all news is owned by a very few. That is not a free press.

 

[swimmy]

Having an 'outrage du jour' is essential for a lot of folks...after all with so much to be outraged about, being able to move from one outrage to another is important when it comes to maintaining a high level of outrage.

Fauxrage, it's all the rage.

Lulz. You were banned from WFF for calling for hundreds of millions of Americans to be hanged because they disagree with your views.

 

[cody-]

Did you know in China is illegal to disparage a Chinese company?

I don't live in China. I never have, and I don't plan to visit. Besides, Tesla Motors is not a Chinese company, so dope non sequitur, fella.

I simply find it pretty damn ironic that so many people believe a social media site micromanaged by someone so egotistical and fragile as Elon Musk would somehow have a more free exchange of ideas when that individual's past actions indicate exactly the contrary.

 

[Anonymous member 148]

Did you know in China is illegal to disparage a Chinese company?

I can't believe it's illegal to use drones for fishing in the US but it's legal in China

China: Video of drone catching fish from pool in Shanghai goes viral, netizens perplexed

m.republicworld.com

 

[Evan B]

I simply find it pretty damn ironic that so many people believe a social media site micromanaged by someone so egotistical and fragile as Elon Musk would somehow have a more free exchange of ideas when that individual's past actions indicate exactly the contrary.

This is my fear - he's always demonstrated anything BUT a belief in "free exchange of ideas." He attacks and goes after those critical of him, is a huge troll, loves attention, and is a malignant narcissist. I am not on "team Elon" when it comes to him having control over a VERY powerful platform.

 

[swimmy]

You don't have a platform with legacy media or on par with them. That's why this whole thing is even a thing. Twitter allows anybody to have a megaphone, even Putin. Well almost anybody anyway.

Yep. Our media is for free speech as long as they can control the narrative. Just look at the contempt they have for journalists or other organizations that provide the other side of the story.

They can call Musk a racist but then turn around and label any idea they disagree with as hate speech.

This is my fear - he's always demonstrated anything BUT a belief in "free exchange of ideas." He attacks and goes after those critical of him, is a huge troll, loves attention, and is a malignant narcissist. I am not on "team Elon" when it comes to him having control over a VERY powerful platform.

Can it really get worse?

"Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation.

The kinds of things that we do about this is, focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.

One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard.”

Parag Agrawal, CEO, Twitter

 

[Dustin Chromers]

I don't live in China. I never have, and I don't plan to visit. Besides, Tesla Motors is not a Chinese company, so dope non sequitur, fella.

I simply find it pretty damn ironic that so many people believe a social media site micromanaged by someone so egotistical and fragile as Elon Musk would somehow have a more free exchange of ideas when that individual's past actions indicate exactly the contrary.

I was simply giving a fun China fact. This fact was unknown to me till recently. In light of that I wouldn't put it past China to have government sanctioned "critics" and for an American company to respond in kind.

 

[Evan B]

Can it really get worse?

"Our role is not to be bound by the First Amendment, but our role is to serve a healthy public conversation and our moves are reflective of things that we believe lead to a healthier public conversation.

The kinds of things that we do about this is, focus less on thinking about free speech, but thinking about how the times have changed.

One of the changes today that we see is speech is easy on the internet. Most people can speak. Where our role is particularly emphasized is who can be heard.”

Parag Agrawal, CEO, Twitter

I mean, it's not entirely different from any business-owned platform, including the very one we're all posting on here. Free speech = the government can't come after you for saying things that are racist, hateful, false, etc. But the owners of the platform can, because they own it.

There's plenty of speech protected by the 1st amendment that isn't welcome on this platform, so while his wording is certainly ominous, I get it.

 

[Canuck from Kansas]

You don't have a platform with legacy media or on par with them. That's why this whole thing is even a thing. Twitter allows anybody to have a megaphone, even Putin. Well almost anybody anyway.

Correct, I don't, and it is not their obligation to give me one, not is it Twitter's or Facebook's or anybody else, and if I were to post something on Twitter (I don't), I still wouldn't have the same platform, so not sure what your point is.

To think Twitter is doing some sort of favour or community good by providing a megaphone to anyone who wants to say anything without any accountability is just a wee bit naive. It as a money making venture, pure and simple - if it starts to lose buckets o' money, see how long the megaphone lasts. Do you really believe "Truth Social" is for the purpose it's name implies? Making up stories that are not true, claiming events that happened never happened, etc, is not free speech or the "free exchange of ideas"; it's lies and garbage, and there should be a way to filter it out and not just throw up your hands and say "free speech". There is a reason you cannot yell fire in a crowded theatre when there is no fire and making it illegal does not impinge on anyone's "free speech" or "free exchange of ideas".

cheers

 

[Dustin Chromers]

I mean, it's not entirely different from any business-owned platform, including the very one we're all posting on here. Free speech = the government can't come after you for saying things that are racist, hateful, false, etc. But the owners of the platform can, because they own it.

There's plenty of speech protected by the 1st amendment that isn't welcome on this platform, so while his wording is certainly ominous, I get it.

Correct, I don't, and it is not their obligation to give me one, not is it Twitter's or Facebook's or anybody else, and if I were to post something on Twitter (I don't), I still wouldn't have the same platform, so not sure what your point is.

To think Twitter is doing some sort of favour or community good by providing a megaphone to anyone who wants to say anything without any accountability is just a wee bit naive. It as a money making venture, pure and simple - if it starts to lose buckets o' money, see how long the megaphone lasts. Do you really believe "Truth Social" is for the purpose it's name implies? Making up stories that are not true, claiming events that happened never happened, etc, is not free speech or the "free exchange of ideas"; it's lies and garbage, and there should be a way to filter it out and not just throw up your hands and say "free speech". There is a reason you cannot yell fire in a crowded theatre when there is no fire and making it illegal does not impinge on anyone's "free speech" or "free exchange of ideas".

cheers

I agree with the both of you. So if Elon buys a publicly traded company legally in our supposed capitalist system then he should be able to do what he wants with his prize? What's the problem then? It's just a business transaction taking place in the great survival of the fittest realm of our economic system. He can ban and control the narrative all he wants. I don't see what everyone is so worried about. I'm sure he will make Twitter better. It's already a cacaphony of self important idiocy. I don't see how it could get any worse.

If we quit dancing and state clearly what this is all about then it's simple. Liberals thought Elon was one of theirs. Now he's revealed he's not and is hated. They view his bid as a total threat. They aren't wrong on that.

For the record I don't tweet. I read tweets sometimes when referred there. I've never been on Truth Social or Parlour.