Twitter agrees to Elon Musk buyout, a reminder we're on Mastodon

If it's really Free speech™, I am looking forward to all the racial slurs, misinformation, and other nice things to be the main discourse on Twitter.

This sounds good, but I deem it impossible. Inside Debian, there's been discussions if the Taiwanese flag should be part of the some country choosing dialogue. You can have trans or non-binary persons anywhere, and then people who like to use personal pronouns that those spoken to deem wrong. Have a weather forecast with coloured countries, what colour to give Crimea. The list goes on. There's no big space without politics.

The text you quoted has a "as far away as possible" in it.
Obviously it's not always possible.
But it is possible in the vast majority of cases.

And it is certainly possible without dragging politics into something that aren't even related to the thing at hand (this is what pseudo-gaming sites like Kotaku do non-stop).

If it's really Free speech™, I am looking forward to all the racial slurs, misinformation, and other nice things to be the main discourse on Twitter.

Hardly.
But even that would be better that than some sanitized variant where people talk to each other like they are walking on eggshells, on the constant brink of a mental breakdown.

Slurs can be ignored or laughed at (as in laughing at the fool who used them), misinformation can be corrected and challenged by facts. But at least it can all happen out in the open, and not some "safe space" for those who can only exist in echo chambers...


Last edited by TheSHEEEP on 26 April 2022 at 2:02 pm UTC

If it's really Free speech™, I am looking forward to all the racial slurs, misinformation, and other nice things to be the main discourse on Twitter.

Frankly, if people are too stupid to be able discern the good from the bad in what they read, then they shouldn't even be on the internet in the first place. This idea that we need media companies to "protect" us is a large part of the problem.

If it's really Free speech™, I am looking forward to all the racial slurs, misinformation, and other nice things to be the main discourse on Twitter.

Frankly, if people are too stupid to be able discern the good from the bad in what they read, then they shouldn't even be on the internet in the first place.

Many are not. So, what to do, keep them out of the net?

This idea that we need media companies to "protect" us is a large part of the problem.

We need facts against FUD.

But even that would be better that than some sanitized variant where people talk to each other like they are walking on eggshells, on the constant brink of a mental breakdown.

Slurs can be ignored or laughed at (as in laughing at the fool who used them), misinformation can be corrected and challenged by facts. But at least it can all happen out in the open, and not some "safe space" for those who can only exist in echo chambers...

Frankly, if people are too stupid to be able discern the good from the bad in what they read, then they shouldn't even be on the internet in the first place. This idea that we need media companies to "protect" us is a large part of the problem.

I count on both of you to spend time on Twitter to educate people and fight misinformation. Otherwise it will keep spreading.

Myself, I have no time to talk to walls and trolls.

I count on both of you to spend time on Twitter to educate people and fight misinformation. Otherwise it will keep spreading.

I do that on Facebook from time to time, but it's really exhausting.

I count on both of you to spend time on Twitter to educate people and fight misinformation. Otherwise it will keep spreading.

I do that on Facebook from time to time, but it's really exhausting.

Yeah the unfortunate reality is that it only takes seconds to create bullshit and much longer than that to clear it up.

Could your remarkable envy and irrational hate of people who are capable of managing money be any more obvious?

It's amazing how well all the people born into generational wealth can manage money even after stupid failure after stupid failure. It's almost like having lots of money makes it easier to buy speech and representation under capitalism which can be used to get money easier...

I wonder how much Musk will really be able to change, without getting into (more) hot water with pretty much every western government outside of the US.

Things like Hate Speech laws that exist here in Canada, *definitely* in Germany and the EU. "We're a private company, now" doesn't shield you from that. Those are big advertising markets he could find himself locked out of if he antagonizes them by letting Twitter degenerate into a free-for-all, because let's be honest, here: the 'free speech' being championed, even if it doesn't purport to be, on the surface, invariably becomes a vehicle for hate of anyone 'other'.

Not that I agree with the way Twitter's handled it up to now (again, ditched for Mastodon years ago), but there's definitely the paradox of tolerance to watch out for. There is a reason most non-US democracies have moved to protect their minority groups in law.

But hey, Musk just *loves* getting in trouble with the law, repeatedly, it seems, so yeah - the irony of everyone talking about 'echo chambers' is that's exactly what Twitter is destined to become, after everyone sensible bails for greener (read: effectively moderated) pastures.

After seeing LGBTQ+ people and racial minorities *already* deal with being harassed off of platforms simply for existing in a mostly white, male, 'techbro dude' space, my only hope is that we get the word out about better alternatives for everyone before that space gets even more toxic.

Nevermind the various politicians on there - you have an office with a mailing address and phone number, and probably e-mail - you don't *need* to be publicly on social media exposing yourself to distracting vitriol from people who aren't even your constituents. I love tech, but mental (and physical!) health is more important.

Of course, many politicians just *love* hearing themselves speak, so sadly I don't expect that to change, either. ;)

...let's be honest, here: the 'free speech' being championed, even if it doesn't purport to be, on the surface, invariably becomes a vehicle for hate of anyone 'other'.

Let's be honest, here: a lot of what is decried as "hate speech" is simply whatever opinion a liberal happens to disagree with. It's like the whole "microaggression" and "white privilege" nonsense where you can be condemned as guilty no matter what you do or say.

I'm not asking for the support or condemnation of any ideology. I can do that elsewhere whenever I want to. I'm asking for a place that gives me a break, for the sake of the projects I enjoy, and my mental health.

This is the main reason I don't participate in social media often, save in anonymous conversations or with people who I actually know offline. It's gotten to the point that we're gaming for "points" instead of wanting real conversations, looking for "gotchas" and reasons to NOT listen, instead of reasons to engage and really further our ideas through other people, even if we find them or their ideas repugnant.

Social media are mainly platforms for propaganda, of any stripe, and it didn't used to be so. The personal should not have become political, because then there is no escape, no fun, no goodwill, no jokes, no honest mistakes, no forgiveness, no meeting of minds as one human to another, both of whom are and always will be fallible; and it's incredibly sad.

...let's be honest, here: the 'free speech' being championed, even if it doesn't purport to be, on the surface, invariably becomes a vehicle for hate of anyone 'other'.

Let's be honest, here: a lot of what is decried as "hate speech" is simply whatever opinion a liberal happens to disagree with. It's like the whole "microaggression" and "white privilege" nonsense where you can be condemned as guilty no matter what you do or say.

What fantasy land do you live in? Please find me any conservative speech on the internet covering LGBTQIA+ issues with a comments section where it isn't just a bunch of downright hateful slurs and mean spirited remarks. I bet you can find this speech on all the "liberal" platforms like youtube, twitter, reddit, etc but I doubt you'll find any with civil discourse. Like are you using an alternate internet where hate speech doesn't exist? Or are you so obtuse as to not find these types of slurs and malicious remarks as not being hate speech?

Or are you so obtuse as to not find these types of slurs and malicious remarks as not being hate speech?

There's a very wide umbrella for that. You don't have to engage with assholes, block them. Part of the problem is whoever that is at the top will decide what is acceptable or not, but there's no way of making everyone happy. Individual responsibility is preferable, because any platform that prefers a top-down method of policy enforcement will always come down on things harder, and likely have more false positives.

If you chase away the "bad speech", it's probably going somewhere else, where you can't see it, but that doesn't get called out on by others and perhaps worsening in intensity. It makes a person dig in their heels on their beliefs, potentially radicalizing them at the worst, when they're banned. If anything, those are the factors that determine overall social acceptability of public speech, losing the ability to see or even call out what you find offensive means this method of in-person social regulation of speech has disappeared, ergo the echo chambers.

In order to prevent this, it's necessary to see things we don't like, even briefly before we block that person. We should know they exist so we can avoid those people if we individually choose.


Last edited by namiko on 26 April 2022 at 4:58 pm UTC

As to what Elon Musk himself might or might not do with Twitter . . . well, I think the open sourcing of the algorithms is a good thing on a number of levels. If nothing else, it will allow for some interesting analysis of just what those algorithms really do, what they promote, what they suppress.

And, I think if he genuinely clamps down on bots that will have a bigger impact than practically anything else he might do. People underestimate bots--we know intellectually that half of Twitter is bots and that that probably skews heavily to the more political/culture-war-ish side of things, but I don't think people really dig what that means to how the platform behaves. If he really scraps 'em that could massively change Twitter, both in its sort of "intensity level" and in terms of what floats to the surface--without bots some of the most inflammatory stuff would get far, far less promotion. It might largely return to being the vapid but relatively harmless entertainment we used to know and despise.

Whatever he might mean to do vis-a-vis "freedom of speech", and however politically slanted his intentions might be in trying to do it, I don't think the results are likely to be as important as the bots thing, if he really does it. No matter what country, there are always limits to free speech--would Twitter under Musk be planning to explicitly allow libel? Presumably not.

I don't actually pretend to fully understand Musk's politics anyway. He likes saying outrageous things (partly I think for the free publicity), he's got some alt-right-ish ideas about Covid, he's strongly anti-union, and he favours coups in countries that want to try to control their own resources if he wants those resources cheap for batteries. But lots of Democrats are into those last two things. And on the other hand, he's obviously a strong believer in stopping climate change and ending fossil fuel use, which is a seriously not-Republican position. I wouldn't be surprised if he's too into ad-hoc techno-utopian solutions to one problem at a time, to adhere to any overall political program. So the implications of his actual political slant on Twitter may be pretty limited and random, really. Except there'll probably be a pro-free-market slant, but what else is new? At least maybe we'll be able to see the algorithms do it.

The thing I miss is, that people listen to each other and then discuss things. But today it mostly is like identifiying the other as right or left.

While I share your sentiment, and hope for the future, for the sake of the discussion let's be clear that such an enlightened time have never actually existed.

In order to prevent this, it's necessary to see things we don't like, even briefly before we block that person. We should know they exist so we can avoid those people if we individually choose.

Individual responsibility is great when you're being targeted by a handful of assholes, not so great when you're up against a massive hate campaign trying to stigmatize your very existence. Right now in the US there is a massive number of anti-LGBTQIA+ bills going through the system and being passed which is having real world consequences that can't just be solved by blocking people, and it's being supported due to the massive amount of misinformation being pushed. Just look at all the accusations of people being groomers being slung for wanting to let children know it's ok to be gay and that it's a normal thing.

...let's be honest, here: the 'free speech' being championed, even if it doesn't purport to be, on the surface, invariably becomes a vehicle for hate of anyone 'other'.

Let's be honest, here: a lot of what is decried as "hate speech" is simply whatever opinion a liberal happens to disagree with. It's like the whole "microaggression" and "white privilege" nonsense where you can be condemned as guilty no matter what you do or say.

What fantasy land do you live in? Please find me any conservative speech on the internet covering LGBTQIA+ issues with a comments section where it isn't just a bunch of downright hateful slurs and mean spirited remarks. I bet you can find this speech on all the "liberal" platforms like youtube, twitter, reddit, etc but I doubt you'll find any with civil discourse. Like are you using an alternate internet where hate speech doesn't exist? Or are you so obtuse as to not find these types of slurs and malicious remarks as not being hate speech?

Eh, it goes both ways. I once made a perfectly polite and respectful remark stating my opposition to a certain issue. In response, I was called every filthy name you can think of by a number of posters. Guess who got banned for "hate speech". Go on, guess.

Eh, it goes both ways. I once made a perfectly polite and respectful remark stating my opposition to a certain issue. In response, I was called every filthy name you can think of by a number of posters. Guess who got banned for "hate speech". Go on, guess.

Attacking people for something they have no control over vs being attacked over holding a view. One of these is hate speech and the other is not.

Eh, it goes both ways. I once made a perfectly polite and respectful remark stating my opposition to a certain issue. In response, I was called every filthy name you can think of by a number of posters. Guess who got banned for "hate speech". Go on, guess.

Attacking people for something they have no control over vs being attacked over holding a view. One of these is hate speech and the other is not.

That's a very common rationalization.

Attacking people for something they have no control over vs being attacked over holding a view. One of these is hate speech and the other is not.

Nobody can stop you from being gay, lesbian, bi, trans, whatever else. Nobody can stop you from expressing yourself in any way you please.

But nobody is obliged to support what you do in this life. I expect fully to encounter people who find my way of life (which is non-traditional by the vast majority, to be purposely opaque) repugnant, disgusting and corrupting to children. I don't associate with those people who believe that about me, some of them family, and online people don't matter, they aren't my family, they aren't my friends, so what they say doesn't matter at all.

If you can't unplug from the virtual square, you're missing out on what life really means. I'd rather a million online strangers hate me so long as my family and friends do not, because they can't stop me from being who I am outside of the screen.

Get into politics yourself if the concern is troubling new laws. Start at the bottom if you want to affect change in a meaningful way that isn't limited to scoring internet points. Try school boards and trustee positions, then it can grow from there. Then you'd be actively promoting and protecting your own beliefs instead of insisting some strangers support you, which doesn't do very much.