• ZeroCool
    link
    fedilink
    English
    78
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    You mean to tell me Elon’s little neo-Nazi shithole might not be properly moderating content to stay on the right side of hate speech laws? …Yeah that’s not surprising.

    • @biofaust
      link
      English
      241 year ago

      What’s surprising is that the US does nothing about it

      • Dojan
        link
        English
        491 year ago

        What I think is surprising is how many still use the fucking platform. It’s completely neutered. Companies shouldn’t be posting news to it because unless you have an account you probably can’t fucking view it.

        • @Zahille7
          link
          English
          91 year ago

          Same. I’m surprised so many people still use for networking at all. I’ll see people post links to the site and I’m just like “well I wish I could’ve seen that. Oh well.”

        • @biofaust
          link
          English
          -81 year ago

          I don’t really see a difference in Twitter pre- and post-Musk. It is literally built for this, for broadcasting with minimal discussion afterwards. I left Twitter a bit before Musk got it because I realized Reddit was better for discussing and obtaining informed opinions. And now I left Reddit.

          • Dojan
            link
            English
            221 year ago

            That’s not what I mean. I mean literally not being able to access stuff when you’re not logged in. How am I supposed to know what this company is posting?

            • @biofaust
              link
              English
              -121 year ago

              I think this could have been the normal evolution of the social network under anyone else than Musk. I repeat, it has always been built this way, for broadcasting. And I am sorry to fire on the Red Cross, but Mastodon is just the same: the only reason it is somewhat better than what Twitter was is that it is novel and barely populated and therefore elicits what in Italy we call mountain path courtesy.

              • @SkippingRelax
                link
                English
                71 year ago

                So just to be clear what old mate you are responding to here is trying to say is that until a few months ago, and for over a decade, me and him could click on a tweet and see what it was about, i used to do this all the time on the Guardian and I haven’t had a twitter account in a very long time.

                Doesn’t matter what you think, what mastodon does and what you do with alpine wildlife. The fact that companies and outlets like the guardian still do this to this day, that they still post shit on twitter than most of us can’t (or don’t want, or both) access is weird they should reconsider their communication choices and move on.

                As they say in Italy che cos’hanno al posto del cervello?

                • @Zahille7
                  link
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  I mean we can all still look at (most) reddit posts if we don’t have an account currently.

                  This whole “forcing us to have an account just to look at one post” is so blatantly and obviously a ploy to get your data. It’s kinda disgusting. I would have a tiny bit more respect for Twitter if they just said outright “hey, you need to login to see any of this content so we can get your data. Thanks and fuck you.”

                  • @SkippingRelax
                    link
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    The funny part is that I can live without shitter no problem. I wish major organisations would stop using it but if I cannot open a like I’m just meh. They lost the little traffic I was giving them.

                    While I stopped browsing reddit since moving to lemmy, I do still access old posts and that’ssomething I cannot replace that easily. Later today I’ll do some research on some niche topics that I am sure will lead me to old reddit posts. Nice to be able to do it without an account (for now). And when they force me, I’ll just open a new one for lunch lurking, not using my old one(s) anymore

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        221 year ago

        How is this surprising to you?

        Half of the US votes for christian nationalist theological fascists that have already successfully banned everything to do with lgtbq people existing in many parts of the country, and about 1/3 of the US population believes in all or significant parts of the insanely hateful and delusional QAnon conspiracy universe.

        You must not be American, or follow American domestic politics closely?

        The Republicans control Congress which means the Democrats cannot pass any legislation, and are in fact bogged down fighting off insane nonsense to basically either somehow give more money to the already wealthy, or fighting off insane shit to take away even more basic rights for minorities.

        Its basically illegal to get an abortion now in half the country.

        And Trump has now multiple times just said he will be a dictator if he wins in 2024, and is currently leading in the polls.

        Like, if you are European, can I fake marry your daughter or something to get the hell out of this collapsing basket case of a society?

        • @biofaust
          link
          English
          31 year ago

          You guessed it, I am not American.

          Nor I have time to spend following the domestic politics of a country that was decadent when it was founded by terrorists (according to its own Constitution).

          I am surprised still because this is 2023 and you are behaving literally medieval de facto instituting a new kind of feudalism gibing power to these people.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            81 year ago

            The easiest way to explain this to a non American is that Americans are highly selfish, vain, anti intellectual, ignorant and superficial compared to much of the rest of the world.

            Hence me asking about getting out.

            Years ago now I was telling my friends that QAnon was such a serious problem that it would endanger the country and even the rest of the world very seriously. I have a degree in Econ and another in Poli Sci, so I was able to explain in detail a worst case scenario.

            Then Jan 6th happened, far exceeding my worst fears.

            A week or so before one friend told me nah man nobody believes in QAnon before, old meme bro.

            Then after Jan 6th they spent a year calling me hyperbolic for describing what Trump and other MAGA Republicans were doing as fascist.

            I no longer speak with them, as in addition to being infuriatingly politically illiterate, they are generally insufferable people who bicker about each other constantly.

            Anyway… yeah. We live in a cyberpunk dystopia over here, half corporate exploitation of everything material, half cruel, absurd and hypocritical hyper christian fundamentalism over our minds.

            • @biofaust
              link
              English
              -41 year ago

              I’ll let you onto a little secret about Europeans: we don’t don’t give half a shit about the US and their “politics”.

              You may well argue that we have your bases in our territory, NATO and your social networks influencing our lives, but I see that as our internal problem of still having to grow a proper pair, rather than an interesting consequence of whatever medieval situation you’re brewing in there.

              And you wish you were in a cyberpunk dystopia. You’re in a boring one.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 year ago

                It’s perfectly fine not to care about another country’s politics, but WTF do you mean putting “politics” in scare quotes? You’re just being condescending for the sake of being condescending, and you’re doing it to someone who is pretty clearly trying to explain things in good faith. If you’re not interested, just don’t read it. It’s not that hard.

                • @biofaust
                  link
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  My “politics” is because I don’t think that any politically relevant (especially for the rest of the world) decision in the US is taken in or by the appointed institutions. And recent events, including the news we are commenting on here, are confirmation of this.

      • @tinkeringidiot
        link
        English
        81 year ago

        There’s nothing to be done about it. Legally there’s no such thing as “hate speech” in the US, and there won’t be unless we get around to changing the first amendment.

      • @jaybone
        link
        English
        11 year ago

        Yeah I’m shocked.

      • @Gigan
        link
        English
        -301 year ago

        Fortunately, the US has free speech protections. It’s not up to some bureaucrats to decide what opinions are illegal.

        • @agent_flounder
          link
          English
          201 year ago

          If it were up to the US Congress to decide what is considered hate speech I don’t think it would work out. The GOP would want to make calling someone “racist” hate speech.

          • Uglyhead
            link
            English
            51 year ago

            Calling someone racist is reverse-racism! /s

            No but seriously, I’ve heard this plop out of a few peoples mouth holes.

          • @Gigan
            link
            English
            21 year ago

            Exactly! You never know who is going to be in charge next, so be very careful what kind of powers you give to the government.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            OTOH, maybe the GOP wouldn’t be like that, or wouldn’t be nearly so powerful, if their voters hadn’t been fed a steady diet of hateful lies for the last 40 years.

            We’re so afraid of the wrong people having the power to limit speech that we’ve instead given them unlimited power to lie. Everything is a trade-off, and the goal shouldn’t be to absolutely prevent a certain kind of abuse of power, but to prevent the worst abuses of all kinds of power, even if it means certain specific abuses are easier. What we have now is like barricading the front door while leaving the back door standing open.

            • @agent_flounder
              link
              English
              11 year ago

              I totally agree. We wouldn’t be in this mess if Reagan hadn’t tossed the Fairness Doctrine out the window. Gee I wonder why he did such a thing. /s

              But here we are. And so getting back on track I think, yes, we need to slightly curtail free speech when it relates to very carefully specified things like public officials inciting violence and specific forms of hate speech because of their significant danger to the public and our institutions of government.

              But I think we aren’t going to get far with that until, as I think you are implying, we bring back the Fairness Doctrine so Fox “News” and OANN and Breitbart and, frankly, some of the similarly bullshit left wing “news” (looking at the media bias chart) like Occupy Democrats or Palmer Report, say.

              Once we can get news bias in check, then, after maybe a generation, we won’t have as many gullible lunatics voting and it will be less likely for right wing extremists to gain seats in congress and wreck everything.

        • @dumpsterlid
          link
          English
          10
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Ok but what if someone figured out where you lived, doxed you and got a mob of angry racists to threaten your family? Maybe it was a joke, but given the amount of extremist angry conservatives these days maybe that threat of violence is real.

          Do you think that is ok? What if so many people were hate messaging you that it utterly overwhelmed your ability to even go on your favorite social network? What if you woke up one day and one of those internet users drove by your house and left a note threatening your life on your door?

          These aren’t hypothetical questions, this is what awful people do when you don’t curtail hate speech (and actively support it like musk does). There are REAL WORLD violent consequences for it and if you have never felt the fear from being targeted by a mob of irrationally angry strangers that want to hurt you than you just don’t really have any meaningful perspective to talk about “free speech” like you are.

          Sure some of the hypotheticals I brought up are also illegal, but there is always a throbbing tumor of bigots spewing hate speech at each other at the heart of this kind of thing that these actions grow out of. These people need to be isolated, shamed and alienated from normal social circles for their behavior or things become dangerous for real human beings. You don’t negotiate with these people, you show them the door when they start spewing hate speech.

          • @Gigan
            link
            English
            31 year ago

            No, that’s where I draw the line. I don’t believe inciting violence should be covered under free speech.

            • @dumpsterlid
              link
              English
              5
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Neither do I, which is why I support not allowing hate speech because the end goal is always violence or the threat of violence whether the people spewing it are conscious of it or not. The lame hateful racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobic jokes that punch down at stereotypes are an advertisement for an ideology of hate (like a lightbulb for moths) and a test to see if that hate will be allowed to flourish in a community.

              • @Gigan
                link
                English
                -11 year ago

                I disagree that the end goal is always violence. And I think what constitutes “hate speech” is subjective and cannot be fairly enforced.

                • muse
                  link
                  fedilink
                  41 year ago

                  Power is the end goal. Violence will be used when no more power can be obtained by legal and nonviolent means.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Dont worry, even if Elon tanked the whole company by publicly telling its main customers, advertisers, to all go fuck themselves, its gonna be the new paypal with 100 trillion dollars in transactions!

      Yes thats right, the company that can barely ever turn a profit, that just corporate public image suicided, and also fired nearly all its staff and now has an insanely toxic work environment that everyone competent is avoiding like the plague…

      Fuck i cant even keep up the gimmick.

      Elon and everything connected to him is so fucking fucked.

    • @SPRUNT
      link
      English
      31 year ago

      He’s on the right side of the hate speech laws. The alt-right side.