Putting aside the doubt.jpg, having the supposed "least" when the opposition is YouTube, Google, Facebook and Instagram isn't exactly a high hurdle. In fact, there's quite a bit of room there to get away with quite a lot of censorship in fact.
Like yeah, be as transparent as possible, but I still don't trust the company to tell the truth, even about this. What's to stop them from only publishing some of the censorship requests? Nothing, that's what.
Is it a win though? Seriously. Can you verify that this will result in Twitter telling the whole truth? That they will publish every request they do and do not follow? What credibility is there here?
I don't trust Musk. He's a weasel that has tried to play both sides for a very long time. Why should I trust him on this now?
You do not know that. That's my point. And frankly, with everything that keeps coming out about him, I do not trust Elon Musk. How hard is that to understand? The man constantly goes back on his word, most recent example being willingness to engage in censorship when he wants to like with the whole What Is A Woman fiasco.
You have zero way to know whether or not this is a win, and never once did I imply it's a binary good/bad, win/loss scenario. In fact, I thought it was pretty damn clear that I was saying that at purely face value this seems good, but I doubt that the reality will be anything close to that.
You wanna celebrate? Go right ahead. Daddy Elon thanks you for it. But I'm not gonna trust Elon's word just because the left don't like him either.
And I think it's premature. I'd be happy to be wrong, but I won't be celebrating without evidence that this is a worthwhile step and not a misdirection where some requests are shown and the more serious ones are kept quiet, where the public think they're getting the truth and grow complacent with what is a lie by omission.
Maybe I'm too doomer. Maybe it's because I have no attachment to that terrible fucking site. But I'm not going to simply listen and believe, and certainly not Musk when I've barely trusted him at all in the past.
What's to stop them from only publishing some of the censorship requests?
Yeah, ideally there would be something baked into the service/protocol itself that logged any moderation actions. Still possible to spoof but more reliable and consistent. (because we know he's going to "forget" to tell us about some request in the future)
Oh I think he's right. Those other platforms are way more censored. He named the big competition, which certainly seems a reasonable set of comparisons to make. I dont' expect him to point out who they censor more than.
I wouldn't give money to wealthy people, either, but I wouldn't avoid buying things that enrich them. This is a service that you buy if you want it, not a charitable donation.
As we all know, Elon always means what he says, commits to each new feature or change, and never backtracks based on public opinion, pressure, or financial considerations. This feature will absolutely not be subject to special exemptions for governments who might pay or pressure him, will be equally applied to all governments, and will not suddenly vanish one day when Elon’s goldfish brain sees some other shiny thing in front of him.
I like the thought of them not knowing whether he'll out them, though. Perhaps it will discourage such requests. All transparency advances the cause of transparency, even selective transparency. Even if he just shames one, that would be good.
US-occupied Japan used to censor newspapers by blocking out sensitive details with black bars. When the US military told them to redact information to make the censorship less obvious, all the Japanese did was write "REDACTED" on top of the bars.
Point is, the "best" censorship is the one people aren't aware of, and give midwits plausible deniability that it was an editorial choice.
Putting aside the doubt.jpg, having the supposed "least" when the opposition is YouTube, Google, Facebook and Instagram isn't exactly a high hurdle. In fact, there's quite a bit of room there to get away with quite a lot of censorship in fact.
Like yeah, be as transparent as possible, but I still don't trust the company to tell the truth, even about this. What's to stop them from only publishing some of the censorship requests? Nothing, that's what.
it's a step in the right direction, we are allowed to be a little happy about events in the world.
For real. Take the W and be happy, people. Things were looking grim indeed before Musk bought Twitter.
Is it a win though? Seriously. Can you verify that this will result in Twitter telling the whole truth? That they will publish every request they do and do not follow? What credibility is there here?
I don't trust Musk. He's a weasel that has tried to play both sides for a very long time. Why should I trust him on this now?
No it's not a win, but it's not a binary win/loss event. Events can be +100 or -100. This is double figure positive.
You do not know that. That's my point. And frankly, with everything that keeps coming out about him, I do not trust Elon Musk. How hard is that to understand? The man constantly goes back on his word, most recent example being willingness to engage in censorship when he wants to like with the whole What Is A Woman fiasco.
You have zero way to know whether or not this is a win, and never once did I imply it's a binary good/bad, win/loss scenario. In fact, I thought it was pretty damn clear that I was saying that at purely face value this seems good, but I doubt that the reality will be anything close to that.
You wanna celebrate? Go right ahead. Daddy Elon thanks you for it. But I'm not gonna trust Elon's word just because the left don't like him either.
And I think it's premature. I'd be happy to be wrong, but I won't be celebrating without evidence that this is a worthwhile step and not a misdirection where some requests are shown and the more serious ones are kept quiet, where the public think they're getting the truth and grow complacent with what is a lie by omission.
Maybe I'm too doomer. Maybe it's because I have no attachment to that terrible fucking site. But I'm not going to simply listen and believe, and certainly not Musk when I've barely trusted him at all in the past.
Yeah, ideally there would be something baked into the service/protocol itself that logged any moderation actions. Still possible to spoof but more reliable and consistent. (because we know he's going to "forget" to tell us about some request in the future)
winner of the special olympics right there...
EU will pass a law banning the publication of censorship demands. can't have transparency... the NSA did the same shit.
Oh I think he's right. Those other platforms are way more censored. He named the big competition, which certainly seems a reasonable set of comparisons to make. I dont' expect him to point out who they censor more than.
Good, let the people know that their apathy to voting and election processes is why they can't speak about their lives.
voot harder!
Where is the tweet of Elon saying that?
Edit : its a subscriber-only tweet!
I would love to support the twitter subscriber feature…. but prefer to give money to someone who isn’t almost a trillionaire !
I wouldn't give money to wealthy people, either, but I wouldn't avoid buying things that enrich them. This is a service that you buy if you want it, not a charitable donation.
As we all know, Elon always means what he says, commits to each new feature or change, and never backtracks based on public opinion, pressure, or financial considerations. This feature will absolutely not be subject to special exemptions for governments who might pay or pressure him, will be equally applied to all governments, and will not suddenly vanish one day when Elon’s goldfish brain sees some other shiny thing in front of him.
I like the thought of them not knowing whether he'll out them, though. Perhaps it will discourage such requests. All transparency advances the cause of transparency, even selective transparency. Even if he just shames one, that would be good.
US-occupied Japan used to censor newspapers by blocking out sensitive details with black bars. When the US military told them to redact information to make the censorship less obvious, all the Japanese did was write "REDACTED" on top of the bars.
Point is, the "best" censorship is the one people aren't aware of, and give midwits plausible deniability that it was an editorial choice.
That may break the website due to governments wanting so much stuff taken down.
That is a feature of scored itself. I think some communities can turn it off. https://kotakuinaction2.win/logs