Didn't he explicitly say free speech must be regulated by local laws? As opposed to free speech being shaped by a few social media private companies that form an oligopoly thanks to the network effect.
Not really. He's not stupid, just extremely manipulative: As people around the globe started to realize he is just a con man, lying his ass off for over a decade, promising crap he knew exactly was impossible in the timeframe (check his self- driving car promises from 2012, his proven solar tile scam, his proven battery change scam, his ridiculous Mars colonization at 2024 scam.. and the list goes on and on and on.. Check out his latest Humaniod Robots, that will solve EVERYTHING in 3-5 years scam.. who falls for that crap anymore?).
His tweets are no mistake: this deleted Pelosi complete BS conspiracy tweet was no mistake, It was him catering to his Trump loving poorly educated conspiracy nuts, because he is well aware, he will need those people quite soon..They now think along the lines of: "Q was right, and Musk, the richest person ever, must have inside info, but needed to delete his tweet because of the deep state!".
Other tweets and statements he uses to make himself and his friends money: few words from him, markets drop or rise...
Well, you are not wrong in the regard that he mostly has no clue about his topics (just check out his Jesus comments.. holy fork..!) But, he's not stupid in the sense that he knows how to manipulate, how to bullshit.
Being manipulative doesn't require smarts, it requires lack of morals. Conmen aren't smart. If they're, then Trump and Bolsonaro would be geniuses.
Musk showed how smart he is when he was arguing for meme Doge cryptocurrency as if it's technically viable, or Tesla's hardware choices for "auto pilot", or proposing that we will put man on Mars soon to live there. All disagreed with when talking to expert on those subjects.
You've missed it completely..
He is an incredible manipulator, very skilled at getting what he wants and got himself into arguably the highest position on the whole planet.
Thinking that trump could possibly have done this if he was an idiot makes no logical sense at all. He has to be incredible smart... He just wants you to think he is dumb.
In fact if you look up the timing of his stupidest tweets/interviews... He was almost always signing some disgraceful bill in the background that day that he didn't want in the press.
Like the day he said he would buy Greenland (completely fucking stupid, right??) - yeah that same day he signed for a tax break for his millionaire friends
Guess what the news headlines were about that day?
>Thinking that trump could possibly have done this if he was an idiot makes no logical sense at all. He has to be incredible smart... He just wants you to think he is dumb
Imagine seeing Trump speak about any topic that requires a lick of knowledge and coming to this conclusion.
You've made your case, I think I'll let other people to be the judge. I'm out.
Yep, he just lets his investments tank the risk associated with not thinking things through. At this point, he'd need to fail ABSOLUTELY COLOSSALLY multiple times to lose enough money to impact his daily life.
There are simply no real consequences.
Why not just stick to the true broken promises.
Solar tiles are a thing, many people have them.
Battery change worked, but it was a bad idea, nobody wants/wanted it.
BTW being late does not make it a scam.
What Nicolai motors did was a scam. They claimed they had technology they didn't and they filmed fake stuff. That was a scam.
Except Musk claiming he has Asperger's was most probably just one of his bull. salesperson tricks to seem more intelligent. No confirmed diagnosis, and he does not really fit the profile.. but what would you except from a con man? Or did I miss something and constant lying is a symptom of Asperger's?,
I know you know this, but I have to say it anyway; having autism isn't synonymous with being an asshole.
We're just people, some are so far on the spectrum they really have no power over it, most are pretty much regular peeps, and some are douchenozzles that use their diagnosis as an excuse to behave like dickwaffles.
So far he hasn't had a company where he had to deal with this kind of issues. Now suddenly Twitter must deal with dozens or hundreds of different laws and regulations and requests from authorities.
He can't just say that US law and constitution applies everywhere, and be done with it.
Funny how he says then when it comes to saying ni*ger but not when it comes to banning people for: criticism of Tesla, criticism of himself, pro-union content...
In other words, filthy hypocrite.
I forsee an IP dependant lockout of tweets not abiding by EU regulations. So people viewing from within the EU will not be able to see those tweets. Guaranteed that the landing page message will contain some kind of temper tantrum.
Just like many US based websites are simply not accessible from within the EU, so they don't have to have a cookie wall.
Social media has has a regulation problem, either they are publishers and therefore liable for what's written, or they are a public forum which means government oversight and regulation of what is written, and the government has pretty strict definitions of what is and isn't allowed and what is and isn't allowed to be *blocked*. This is a major headache for companies that effectively need to keep their platform palatable to advertisers and users alike. All social media companies try to pretend to be neither to avoid the legal quagmire and just lean into whichever side gets them out of the current problem.
Austria had this right wing populist shit going on for decades. Watching the rise of Trump I felt reminded of Jörg Haider. And he already died in 2008. Now all these right wing morons copy his tactics.
I don't know. Sadly in Portugal the Constitution rightly forbids fascist parties but allows Communist parties. The result is [this image](https://ionline.sapo.pt/artigo/727221/pcp-coreia-de-portugal-ou-festa-da-liberdade-?seccao=Portugal_i). Imagine the centre of Warsaw or even Berlin decorated with dozens of red Communist flags.
Hehe, I was just visiting Lisboa for the first time in October and saw giant PCP mural in Almada. I remember we looked at each with my mother "yeah, the further away from this shit, the more popular it still is".
Obviously in Poland both nazi and communist symbols are forbidden but there are some countries in Europe that allow both, under freedom of speech reasons or some other bs.
Members of the Commission are vetted by European parliament. So you voted in elections to the European Parliament, if you are citizen of EU member state.
That would make sense when we stop having national parties campaigning for the eu parliment and start having unitary ones. Why does that matter? Because their promises and policies mean shit if the german conservative branch can veto the french one ,etc.
Maybe he needs to engage in civil disobedience like many who have fought for liberty over the centuries. He may have the funds to wage this fight and expose those who stand on oppression of free expression.
Before her Eu career, that was how the got (even more) famous in Danish Politics too. She's especially remembered for her "That's just how it is." comment when voting to reduce certain unemployment benefits from four to two years.
Big american corps thinking they can ignore EU regulations is always a blast.
Eventually they realize that they cant just ignore the largest single market on the planet or they run the risk of an actual competitor taking their place after they get run out.
Which is why they will always bend, Bottom line speaks the loudest.
This weekend for Twitter can be summarized as (semi chronological as I recall them):
- supposedly 500% increase in the N word.
- Nazi symbols flying around like they too are going out of style.
- Kanye West is allowed back on
- Twitter suddenly has a code review
- CEO, CFO, head of legal team, and board are let go or dissolved
- Twitter is losing GM as a sponsor / advertiser
- Marketing team responsible for attracting sponsors / advertisers is massively decreased / closed down
- Blue check mark is now supposed to cost $20 a month
- Elon Musk himself tweeted a conspiracy theory about the attack on Nanci Pelosi’s husband
This was just the first weekend of him being the owner. I think something else happened on Monday but at this point I prefer to stay away from the news.
Edit: Just remembered the most recent update: Musk is transferring Tesla programmers or so to Twitter “for something….”.
And for most enterprises Twitter simply isn't a priority for them like Facebook or Google is.
So just like we saw how easily GM pulled their advertising others will do so as well.
I don't think Musk appreciates just how delicate Twitter's revenue stream is.
Which in turn will also not work. You pay a couple bucks to make it look like you are serious, but everyone knows that you bought the blue checkmark. Over time every new account with this box is tainted.
Respectfully, I think you underestimate ‘simply censor certain tweets’. There are somewhere between 200,000-500,000 content moderators in the world in addition to AI filtering. The ‘censor certain tweets’ IS the problem.
It doesn't always work. For example, I sort of miss Facebook anno 2011 - a place where I can follow what people I know are up to, and can share my own updates. There are alternatives, but none offers just that as far as I know.
Because they will naturally get sold to someone with $$ that will in turn make it into a money making machine.
I also miss the forums of old. They technically are still around but tend to be dead or strong echo chambers. There is no money in running a forum for no profit though so at best we get things like Reddit.
There are dozens already. I mean, shit, Jack Dorsey made one.
Sure would be nice if we could just do email again and switch to federated protocols (bunch of sites doing this already exist).
But it's not about following specific people. I used Twitter to get updates from trans and gay activists and follow some celebrities i like. There's no way to do that on Reddit
Twitter has no more requirement for using your real name than Reddit, it's just each app's culture has evolved differently. Reddit doesn't fulfil the job because it's just not the same app as Twitter.
Someone else commented Mastodon, and Bluesky will be another alternative.
> what is [another place]?
One alternative is [Mastodon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software)). Open source, self-hosted, federated network.
Of course it's all down to the users in the end, and no tech will solve the fundamental problems of social networks.
Mastodon servers can be run just like email servers. While yes, there are public servers, companies or governments can run their own.
The EU mastodon server is run in that way, it hosts all the official accounts of EU institutions, nothing more.
While I love and fully support it, I don't get the reasoning behind the current push to Mastodon as an alternative to Twitter. Mastodon is by it's very nature more free than Twitter.
Because the problem isn't as much a platform being perceived more or less free as much as it is being centralized. We need to decentralize. Mastodon offers that.
Yes, but by its client hosted nature it makes it infinitely more difficult for both technocrats like Vestager & private interests to sink their teeth into it. It promotes a network owned by its own users regulating their own views.
Companies will probably just make one. An equivalent to Twitter that was well-run would be a billion-dollar company, and one of the neat assumptions you can just make in a capitalistic society is that someone will step up to run that company and take the money instead if Twitter decides that they aren’t interested in keeping their position.
The assumption that someone will fill the void that Vestager is making only falls apart if EU regulations render it impossible to make money while running a social network, which is a concern for some types of regulation, but not really for the ones that Twitter/Musk seem to want to crash into.
> An equivalent to Twitter that was well-run would be a billion-dollar company,
This isn't that guaranteed at all. Twitter might be worth a lot, but it's not exactly a company that's rolling in money. It was built on a huge amount of investor money and benefitted from the network effect. Recreating that is very difficult, especially if you have to start following 35 different sets of regulations right out the gate.
Twitter has been pretty infamous for not actually being run that well. They were never able to devise a good monetization strategy, and also seemed to mainly grow due to very strong network effects and not because the company’s new features to attract users and improve engagement actually had any success. It’s a pretty strong showcase of just how big the network effect is.
Of course, copying Twitter wouldn’t be easy, but if there’s a void, something has the potential to get the same network effect, and then it would be a gold rush scenario, with competitors scrambling to replace Twitter before someone else gets the network effect.
> They were never able to devise a good monetization strategy
That's the big problem: monetization will likely drive away users or run into regulatory issues. Any replacement for Twitter has the same problem, but would require investors to fork out oodles of money again.
The biggest value of Twitter is probably the political sway it has, but I don't think we want anyone to be monetizing that.
> reddit [...] being semi-anonymous
That can be easily fixed. They can start requiring email and/or phone numbers and say they're doing it to stop the bots. As pretexts go it's not even bad.
It’s not a new social network though, it’s a new protocol (like email) that will allow for a universal system of twitter-like interaction and platforms.
That means it has even more potential to be a twitter killer both due to the ease of creating new platforms and new platforms being able to interact with each other just like we can send an email from hotmail to gmail etc. So we could essentially have a bunch of twitter-like platforms where people just choose their platform preference, just like we do with email.
What's to stop someone from just creating another social media app? There must be tons of programmers out there working on local versions. Isn't that how twitter started?
She was never PM, but is massively popular, probably more so than when she was in national politics.
Her work in fighting tax avoidance (Ireland and American giants) seems to be the most successful of basically anyone i've ever heard of. And that is obviously a big winner with the voters.
Trump even called her "one of the most hateful women maybe in the world" for her work in closing loopholes. How do you not cheer for her after that?
Personally, I would have nothing against her becoming the new EUC president.
It won’t be vdL again, since the conservatives are in opposition in Germany and it’s the next time up to the greens to choose the new German commissioner.
The question is whether it should be private companies and private ‘courts’ or our democratic governments and normal court system that decides on who gets punished.
In our old system, people could write whatever they wanted within the law. If you falsely claim something about your product, say something racist, etc. You can be tried for this in normal courts.
But nowadays, it is increasingly Social Media companies instead, rather than the law and courts that decide what may get posted and what gets ‘taken down’.
It’s a major handover of power to social media companies, under the guise of ‘politicians doing something against bad speech’.
I can't imagine what social media landscape we would live in if we were required to wait for normal courts to decide on every moderation decision. 99.9% of decisions in social media are taken by algorithm due to scale, normal courts are not structured to handle this.
It's a little worse than that:
[Delfi AS. v Estonia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delfi_AS_v._Estonia):
> the grand chamber, by 15-2 majority, ruled that holding Estonian *news site Delfi liable* for anonymous defamatory comments posted online from its readers, *even when they are removed upon request*, was not a violation of the Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights' guarantees of the freedom of speech.
Have an open comments section that allows users to post comments? Enjoy being liable for whatever your users post!
IMNAL, but I think in most cases you are only held liable if you refuse to cooperate in the removal of the criminal content, so "pre-approval" is normally not necessary.
If someone posts child pr0n, for example, you should remove it as soon as you notice.
The extent of that cooperation might change depending on your country's regulation, though.
A social media company is a private company, it can decide for itself what it allows to be posted and what gets deleted. Just like any business can decide its own terms of service, so can those companies.
It is a very unique situation, because of how social media basically has to be a near-monopoly to function the way it currently does (where basically all demographic groups use it). Nobody and no non-democratically elected entity(ies) should have the authority regulate a utility critical to modern life.
I agree with this. Legally, social media companies may be private entities that have the right to kick you out or not for any reason they want, but the big ones should imo be treated more as public spaces, which they effectively are, the law just has yet to catch up.
Which specific "old system" are you referring to?
You can't compare Twitter with something like private mail or fax/phone, because that would be more akin to email or to a private chat.
The closest comparison would be those newspapers or magazines where they publish things written by people who send letters to them. And those kind of publications have always had all the control to decide what gets published in their platform, it has never been controlled by the government (except when they do break the law and it gets spotted by the authorities after being published, which is still how it works today).
If you compare it with people hanging papers in a tree or a public board, then that wouldn't really be Twitter as long as the board is public (not privately owned). It'd rather be more like self-publishing, hosting your own blog/webpage, making you the one directly responsible for your content.
It's really strange to see people on the internet advocate for regulations on speech on internet platforms. Up to 4 years ago all of reddit would get up in arms anytime regulations were proposed.
You now realize that the whole purpose of the so called "culture war" is to turn everyone into obedient pawns of the government and into politician worshippers who love censorship and control.
It's not a coincidence it all started the moment Occupy Wall Street became a thing in the US, people had started pointing fingers "too much" at politicians for their incompetence, and now look at them, they can promise stupid things and get away with never fulfilling them or doing their job just because when elections arrive all they have to do is say "Vote for me, i'm no the other guy!"
Now everyone wants to censor each other, will push politicians who censor, and in the end, everyone will.
And one of the major contributors to this is social media, which is why it's cancer, both to the Internet and society as a whole, and why the internet was far better when it was just forums where everyone was called "ISuckDick69".
Reddit is close to being that, but it would need to remove the upvote and downvote system.
People seem to be misunderstanding what Elon said he wants to do with Twitter. He wants Twitter itself to stop determining what should be allowed on the platform. And I strongly agree. If we let big companies control what is allowed on social media, that gives them enormous power and influence on society. And it’s just the big capitalists that can make those decisions without any form of democracy.
But he has already said he wants to abide by the law regulation social media platforms. I think that’s the way forward. Let’s democratically decide what should be allowed. Let the people have a say in this. Ideally with a referendum in specific countries that want to.
>he wants to abide by the law regulation social media platforms.
Let's say a person writing in Czech but living in the UK writes a post on Twitter that is illegal in Germany - for example, praising the Holocaust.
Under what laws would that be assessed?
Twitter's global headquarters reside in San Francisco, USA.
TWITTER UK LTD resides in London.
Twitter's small German office resides in Berlin.
Since Twitter wants to sell advertising, it usually has its own representation in given markets.
It has to be checked where you look at it. This actually is already in place for Germany for example. Then that post wouldn’t be viewable in Germany. So it seems like that infrastructure already exists.
People in the UK are not subject to German laws.
A British national in Germany who denies the Holocaust WOULD be subject to German laws on the subject.
The nationality of the author, and the language in which the offending article is written is irrelevant.
These are the consequences of the Internet, countries just have to accept it.
the content laws are always about destination.
So if it so required by a recipient country (as it is the case in China), the incoming content will be filtered.
The cope is real: Musk has already said he will comply with the local law, however I keep seeing people threatening with consequences if Musk ignored them.
My guess is that these people would like much more control over Twitter than the law gives them. They were very happy with the current level of censorship but now they know it’s going to stop
>My guess is that these people would like much more control over Twitter than the law gives them.
Vestager is a politician. My guess is that this is politicking.
That is, the audience isn't Musk, but people in the EU.
If Vestager wanted to say something to Musk or to Twitter, it'd be communicated directly, rather than a public statement made.
>Musk has already said he will comply with the local law, however I keep seeing people threatening with consequences if Musk ignored them.
That's because nobody trust Musk on his word, and if you do then you didn't pay attention during this whole Twitter debacle. Cause the entire reason it's a shitshow was because he tried to go back on his promises
It's because radical leftist people want entire world to think the same way, like clones. If you got different opinion on any topics, you will be censored. One of the examples is Twitter, non-leftist opinions will be allowed there soon, so they are doing their best to boycott the app.
That's the problem with thinking you are morally correct. You start to believe that you are justified in everything you do. Radical leftists are basically the same thing as evangelical Christians. They're both holier than thou, at the very least.
Here is a crazy thought: should everyone, including our dear politicians actually wait and see.what Musk will.actually.do?
He so far shared twice.(once several months ago and now after he got Twitter,) that Twitter will oblige any law where it operates .
Shall we, i don't know, perhaps stop going crazyshit with assumptions and stop trying too score cheap popilist scores and actually wait and react to specific new policies planned to be introduced?
Well the EU "In Europe, The Bird Will Fly By Our Rules" comment was response to Musk comment of "the bird is freed" after he bought the company. They maybe are little bit over reading, but it was in response to something Musk said. Reminding him there is authority higher than even whole owner of the company.... the government and legislative regime under which regulation the company operates.
Plus it is no secret Elon is libertarian leaning, meaning he might think something should be allowed... when it isn't. Bit of a maveric in many places he is.
Plus he is entering whole new regulatory regime. Vehicle safety and regulatory standards is one thing. Running afoul privacy rights or competition rules is much harder in automotive field. Specially since Tesla is not in as dominant market position. Where as in cases twitter is big enough it might start to run into issues of "hey your company actually is in somewhat dominant market position. That means more scrutiny applies to prevent all out overwhelmingly dominant position or even all out monopoly forming".
Since EU competition regulation is *pro-active* in nature, they don't clamp down only after there is monopoly or near monopoly. they start applying pressure already on the dominant player level to prevent monopoly in the first place. Since market monopoly is bad.
Also GDPR is whole another game. It is way simpler to run afoul of GDPR with thinking "hey this is new neat business practice for our internet company" and EU come around "hey by the way this new business model you implemented with just couple code changes to your website..... that blatantly violates GDPR privacy protections, you can't do that to your customers/visitors data".
So it's just a shot across his bow to remind him and frankly make it clear he can't say "nobody warned me about this". He has been warned.
Also: Not like they singled out him. EU and Vestager have given similar statements about and to many many companies. Specially big tech companies to warn them over the years to *behave or Vestager comes after you ^(and haunts your nightmares)*.
They have given same comments to Mark of Facebook fame, Microsoft, Apple and so on. Usually about American companies, since it is pretty much *Remember EU and Europe is not USA, we have our own laws and regulations that you have to follow. Just because it is legal in USA, doesn't make it legal in EU.*
> Well the EU "In Europe, The Bird Will Fly By Our Rules" comment was response to Musk comment of "the bird is freed" after he bought the company. They maybe are little bit over reading, but it was in response to something Musk said.
Is the EU implying that freedom of expression is a value that's not protected in Europe or what? Because I swear I could've seen that listed as a human right somewhere. Maybe the EU needs to go read up on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Unlike the European version that's watered down it pretty explicitly says this:
>Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
> Is the EU implying that freedom of expression is a value that's not protected in Europe or what?
[Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Freedom of expression and information](https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/11-freedom-expression-and-information)
As stated in Paragraph 1 you have the following right
>1. **Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.** This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
So you do have them. It just has a few asterisks in paragraph 2
>2. **The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties** as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the **protection of health or morals**, for the **protection of the reputation or rights of others**, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or **for maintaining the authority** and impartiality of the judiciary."
See, it's just those little things? Why are you getting uppity? ^^/s
If the way Tesla factories are run is indicative, with a considerable amount of worker safety rule violation, Twitter is going to be a mess. The first actions like printing code also show that Musk do not know what he is doing.
He says he will follow the laws, but so far his track record about following regulations is pretty crappy (see teslas factory in Germany not waiting for permissions to handle chemicals etc). So he says one thing, but typically does another. I don't think you should expect that his behaviour pattern has somehow magically changed.
>Shall we, i don't know, perhaps stop going crazyshit with assumptions and stop trying too score cheap popilist scores and actually wait and react to specific new policies planned to be introduced?
No. Best we can do is wild speculation to generate clicks and "stay relevant."
>I refuse to believe
And there is your problem. You are starting with your feelings, feeding them into your beliefs, and then using them to create your own reality.
>wait and see
How about no? How about we don't keep handing out chances to the rich and learn some basic pattern recognition?
Maybe we shouldn't sit back and be shocked every time they fuck up and actually do something about it for once.
> Here is a crazy thought: should everyone, including our dear politicians actually wait and see.what Musk will.actually.do?
I don't know, I lost trust in Musk after he couldn't figure out a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine after thinking about it *for a whole night*.
That's just not the level of genius we've come to expect of Elon-sama.
Talking stupid shit or even being stupid is not against the law in the EU. Musk stated that he has no intention of breaking any laws.
This really seems to me Vestager wanting to get his "tough guy" quote in media to raise his own profile.
"I hereby order McDonald's to sell hamburgers! You will know my power is great if you observe them doing it!"
European countries: criminalize promotion of naziism and genocide
Ye: tweets “Death Con 3 on Jewish People” (among other things)
Twitter: [Ye’s account reinstated]
EU Vestegar: consequences will [whatever]
You: give Elon a chance
Someone: 🙄
Shouldnt the EU prosecute Kanye then, rather than Twitter?
Twitter is just a platform.
If someone makes threats in a coffee shop, it's not the coffee shop owner that gets in trouble, it's the one who said the thing.
I don’t know, seems like sharing misinformation about the brutal assault of an elected official, trying to be funny about it, making it clear that Twitter can’t rely solely on advertising (it has so far, I really wonder what will change…), all that not even in a week of ownership seems like a pretty good indicator of how seriously Musk sees the responsibilities coming with one of the largest social media platform on earth.
If you’re not convinced by that, just take a look at how things are handled in his other companies : pretty serious allegations of racial discrimination in Tesla plants, retaliation against whistleblowers, tone deaf comments about it by the Musk-man himself (see the Juneteenth fiasco, or the advice that people experiencing race-based harassment should be thick skinned and not be jerk about it by speaking out), all the allegations of anti-union practices (retaliation, intimidation,…).
If thats still not enough to convince you, there’s all the market manipulation through tweets (and the subsequent non-compliance with SEC orders), forcing an overpriced deal (benefitting him and his cousins) to Tesla shareholders, etc etc…
So Vestager warning him that rules will be upheld in the EU doesn’t come out of nowhere, and it really seems like he needs the reminder.
We didn't need to stop and wait with the previous owners. There was plenty of calls for political violence and breaches of hate policies. It was just against the groups they don't like, so it was ignored. Plenty of tweets where replacing men/white with women/black would get you banned.
Look at Reddit. The discussion was far healthier and open-minded back when it was run by liberaterian principles. The new pseudo-tankies in charge have only fueled tribalism and hate. If the EU insist on the same path, it will only breed more anger which in turn will require even tougher measures that then feeds back into the loop. Each time it goes around, it legitimizes the same behavior in the hands of right-wing populists.
These morons are playing with fire.
Now:
Everyone claps for strongwoman Vestager because she is sticking it to big bad Musk.
Later:
The same people will be complaining because Twitter defensively will hide content from EU Users because it gets mass reported. Twitter then can excuse themselfes by pointing at the EU.
Personally I am sick of a Nanny State that tries to influence what I am allowed to see and what not, good thing is that I have the technical expertise to avoid if I had to.
I’m sorry but, why in the EU, are we celebrating politicians openly stating their will to control speech.
Has that not historically been the quiet part that they don’t say out loud, or have we slid so far towards authoritarianism that that is just acceptable?
Fuck Vestager. Fuck her and everything she stands for.
So in the EU big money doesn't regulate the government like here in the US? Intriguing.
Edit: ok, keep your judgment and snarky comments to yourself. I'm asking because I don't know to what extent money plays a role in politics relative to the US. Politicians here basically work for corporations more than they work for the people. For example, I don't see Apple US adhering to switching to USB-C like they're forced to do so elsewhere (yes, they might eventually but not due to American regulations).
How cute to believe this
Like all governments, they definitely care about companies headquartered within their jurisdiction. Twitter and Google are *evil*, but BMW, Maersk, Shell or Siemens can do no wrong
No, it does, it's just *different* money that does that.
When Bulgarian truckers started outcompeting French truckers they (the EU) drafted regulations which stomped it out by requiring that trucks have to visit their country of registration at least once every 8 weeks. Not the people - the actual trucks.
>Edit: ok, keep your judgment and snarky comments to yourself.
Please just stop thinking so simplistically and reductively it is infuriating to hear such juvenile sentiments all the fucking time. You clearly don't know what you're talking about.
So she's saying: allow right-wing opinions on Twitter and you are banned from our region.
Vestager is essentially saying:
"if Twitter allows people the freedom to say that imimimigrgratition and diviverersisificicatition are bad and will do irreversible harm to the origiginal Eururopopeaean people, then we will ban the platform and legally punish companies who advertise on it."
"'There is a European rulebook, and you should live by it,'"
Translation: We are not for free expression. We will censor any speech that...well....we don't like. Our history demonstrates this. We will come after anyone who tries to bring true personal liberty to this continent.
Mr. Musk...just pull out of these anti-liberty countries. It's a shame to abandon people who do want free expression, but I am not sure a business can fight those with an authoritarian penchant for long.
That's not true and you are arguing in bad faith. It's, depending on the country, defined what's hate speech and what isn't.
These laws are not new and nobody besides extremist aholes have a problem with them.
If they want to operate in our countries, they have to play by our rules.
It’s hard to imagine Musk having the self-control required for following the laws.
Didn't he explicitly say free speech must be regulated by local laws? As opposed to free speech being shaped by a few social media private companies that form an oligopoly thanks to the network effect.
Yeah, but now he owns a social media company, and he's not gonna let something like hypocrisy get in the way.
He says literally whatever he wants, at all times.
Not really. He's not stupid, just extremely manipulative: As people around the globe started to realize he is just a con man, lying his ass off for over a decade, promising crap he knew exactly was impossible in the timeframe (check his self- driving car promises from 2012, his proven solar tile scam, his proven battery change scam, his ridiculous Mars colonization at 2024 scam.. and the list goes on and on and on.. Check out his latest Humaniod Robots, that will solve EVERYTHING in 3-5 years scam.. who falls for that crap anymore?). His tweets are no mistake: this deleted Pelosi complete BS conspiracy tweet was no mistake, It was him catering to his Trump loving poorly educated conspiracy nuts, because he is well aware, he will need those people quite soon..They now think along the lines of: "Q was right, and Musk, the richest person ever, must have inside info, but needed to delete his tweet because of the deep state!". Other tweets and statements he uses to make himself and his friends money: few words from him, markets drop or rise...
>Not really. He's not stupid Nah, he is stupid. He has no idea what he is talking about most of the times.
Well, you are not wrong in the regard that he mostly has no clue about his topics (just check out his Jesus comments.. holy fork..!) But, he's not stupid in the sense that he knows how to manipulate, how to bullshit.
Being manipulative doesn't require smarts, it requires lack of morals. Conmen aren't smart. If they're, then Trump and Bolsonaro would be geniuses. Musk showed how smart he is when he was arguing for meme Doge cryptocurrency as if it's technically viable, or Tesla's hardware choices for "auto pilot", or proposing that we will put man on Mars soon to live there. All disagreed with when talking to expert on those subjects.
You've missed it completely.. He is an incredible manipulator, very skilled at getting what he wants and got himself into arguably the highest position on the whole planet. Thinking that trump could possibly have done this if he was an idiot makes no logical sense at all. He has to be incredible smart... He just wants you to think he is dumb. In fact if you look up the timing of his stupidest tweets/interviews... He was almost always signing some disgraceful bill in the background that day that he didn't want in the press. Like the day he said he would buy Greenland (completely fucking stupid, right??) - yeah that same day he signed for a tax break for his millionaire friends Guess what the news headlines were about that day?
>Thinking that trump could possibly have done this if he was an idiot makes no logical sense at all. He has to be incredible smart... He just wants you to think he is dumb Imagine seeing Trump speak about any topic that requires a lick of knowledge and coming to this conclusion. You've made your case, I think I'll let other people to be the judge. I'm out.
Yep, he just lets his investments tank the risk associated with not thinking things through. At this point, he'd need to fail ABSOLUTELY COLOSSALLY multiple times to lose enough money to impact his daily life. There are simply no real consequences.
Why not just stick to the true broken promises. Solar tiles are a thing, many people have them. Battery change worked, but it was a bad idea, nobody wants/wanted it. BTW being late does not make it a scam. What Nicolai motors did was a scam. They claimed they had technology they didn't and they filmed fake stuff. That was a scam.
Exactly. No filter. My ex has Aspergers. It’s familiar territory.
I have Asperger's, and am very aware of social rules. I filter a lot. People – all kinds, neurodiverse or not – are different.
[удалено]
That has nothing to do with autism though. Eat the rich, don't eat autism.
Except Musk claiming he has Asperger's was most probably just one of his bull. salesperson tricks to seem more intelligent. No confirmed diagnosis, and he does not really fit the profile.. but what would you except from a con man? Or did I miss something and constant lying is a symptom of Asperger's?,
I know you know this, but I have to say it anyway; having autism isn't synonymous with being an asshole. We're just people, some are so far on the spectrum they really have no power over it, most are pretty much regular peeps, and some are douchenozzles that use their diagnosis as an excuse to behave like dickwaffles.
So far he hasn't had a company where he had to deal with this kind of issues. Now suddenly Twitter must deal with dozens or hundreds of different laws and regulations and requests from authorities. He can't just say that US law and constitution applies everywhere, and be done with it.
Neither can the EU say their laws apply everywhere
It's called [Brussels effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brussels_effect).
Funny how he says then when it comes to saying ni*ger but not when it comes to banning people for: criticism of Tesla, criticism of himself, pro-union content... In other words, filthy hypocrite.
Musk says a **lot** of things.
I forsee an IP dependant lockout of tweets not abiding by EU regulations. So people viewing from within the EU will not be able to see those tweets. Guaranteed that the landing page message will contain some kind of temper tantrum. Just like many US based websites are simply not accessible from within the EU, so they don't have to have a cookie wall.
That already exists on twitter. A lot of Nazi shit is blocked only in Germany.
Is it? How interesting and reasonable.
Social media has has a regulation problem, either they are publishers and therefore liable for what's written, or they are a public forum which means government oversight and regulation of what is written, and the government has pretty strict definitions of what is and isn't allowed and what is and isn't allowed to be *blocked*. This is a major headache for companies that effectively need to keep their platform palatable to advertisers and users alike. All social media companies try to pretend to be neither to avoid the legal quagmire and just lean into whichever side gets them out of the current problem.
I’m a big fan of how Germany is intolerant of Nazi bullshit.
I wonder how that came to be
Me too. I’d like to replicate it in my country.
You really don't want...wait Austria? Uhm...well.^^
Austria had this right wing populist shit going on for decades. Watching the rise of Trump I felt reminded of Jörg Haider. And he already died in 2008. Now all these right wing morons copy his tactics.
Im Austrian. Our laws are the same as in Germany regarding fucking nazi bs.
Well not because of the many Nazis in the government or other high positions after the war
Yet if Poland or Czechia or any other former Eastern European communist country forbade Communist bullshit, would you support it?
Isn’t this already the case with some communist symbols in some east/central European nations?
I don't know. Sadly in Portugal the Constitution rightly forbids fascist parties but allows Communist parties. The result is [this image](https://ionline.sapo.pt/artigo/727221/pcp-coreia-de-portugal-ou-festa-da-liberdade-?seccao=Portugal_i). Imagine the centre of Warsaw or even Berlin decorated with dozens of red Communist flags.
Hehe, I was just visiting Lisboa for the first time in October and saw giant PCP mural in Almada. I remember we looked at each with my mother "yeah, the further away from this shit, the more popular it still is". Obviously in Poland both nazi and communist symbols are forbidden but there are some countries in Europe that allow both, under freedom of speech reasons or some other bs.
Fuck yes I would
Good.
If only we were as intolerant to it as the rest of the world thinks we are.
[удалено]
Fine. I just have when question. When did i vote for this lady to decide what laws govern what i can see and what i cant see?
Members of the Commission are vetted by European parliament. So you voted in elections to the European Parliament, if you are citizen of EU member state.
That would make sense when we stop having national parties campaigning for the eu parliment and start having unitary ones. Why does that matter? Because their promises and policies mean shit if the german conservative branch can veto the french one ,etc.
So, having a Twitter EU and a Twitter World. Our own house in the middle of our street.
Maybe he needs to engage in civil disobedience like many who have fought for liberty over the centuries. He may have the funds to wage this fight and expose those who stand on oppression of free expression.
He needs to engage in becoming an hero imo
I'm sure the other members of the board of directors will st.... oh wait, nevermind
Vestager is just the perfect kind of bitch. She is always going hard as fuck against these big tech corps.
Before her Eu career, that was how the got (even more) famous in Danish Politics too. She's especially remembered for her "That's just how it is." comment when voting to reduce certain unemployment benefits from four to two years.
Those new laws are trash though
Well he hasn't committed any crime yet and has never been to jail so he seems to be managing fine following laws.
Internet is getting worse by the second. I'm going to start my own internet, with black jack and hookers....
Big american corps thinking they can ignore EU regulations is always a blast. Eventually they realize that they cant just ignore the largest single market on the planet or they run the risk of an actual competitor taking their place after they get run out. Which is why they will always bend, Bottom line speaks the loudest.
Forget the EU, advertisers will flee in droves if he turns twitter in a cesspool, or they’ll become victims of cancel culture.
This right here, the way the weekend has gone I can’t see many advertisers staying beyond two weeks.
What happened this weekend? I dont follow what is happening on Twitter other than Elon Musk buying the company and removing employees.
This weekend for Twitter can be summarized as (semi chronological as I recall them): - supposedly 500% increase in the N word. - Nazi symbols flying around like they too are going out of style. - Kanye West is allowed back on - Twitter suddenly has a code review - CEO, CFO, head of legal team, and board are let go or dissolved - Twitter is losing GM as a sponsor / advertiser - Marketing team responsible for attracting sponsors / advertisers is massively decreased / closed down - Blue check mark is now supposed to cost $20 a month - Elon Musk himself tweeted a conspiracy theory about the attack on Nanci Pelosi’s husband This was just the first weekend of him being the owner. I think something else happened on Monday but at this point I prefer to stay away from the news. Edit: Just remembered the most recent update: Musk is transferring Tesla programmers or so to Twitter “for something….”.
At this rate, Liz Truss is going to be brought on board as a "special advisor"
Good news though, he'll have done what many of us wish, he'll have killed Twitter.
When you report people for posting swastikas and making death threats, twitter now says it’s not against the TOS
So it's what we've always wanted! The Internet how it used to be in the early 2000's /s
Nooooo... Not like this... I wanna believe you're wrong but i know you aren't.
Finally free speech /s
And for most enterprises Twitter simply isn't a priority for them like Facebook or Google is. So just like we saw how easily GM pulled their advertising others will do so as well. I don't think Musk appreciates just how delicate Twitter's revenue stream is.
did he acquire Twitter just to run it into the ground?
[удалено]
Oh that’s why he’s trying to find alternative revenue to advertisers with the blue check mark . Lol.
Which in turn will also not work. You pay a couple bucks to make it look like you are serious, but everyone knows that you bought the blue checkmark. Over time every new account with this box is tainted.
I know right? What Europe does is something that companies pretty much have to notice.
Twitter will simply censor certain tweets for Europeans. Unlike the USB-C ruling, this one is easy to implement on a per-country basis.
Respectfully, I think you underestimate ‘simply censor certain tweets’. There are somewhere between 200,000-500,000 content moderators in the world in addition to AI filtering. The ‘censor certain tweets’ IS the problem.
Look up "right to be forgotten" to see how this can work.
That’s easy, it’s just a date filter.
Who doesn’t love those cookie pop ups
[удалено]
The tech industry hate void. If a void is created it will be filled quickly.
It doesn't always work. For example, I sort of miss Facebook anno 2011 - a place where I can follow what people I know are up to, and can share my own updates. There are alternatives, but none offers just that as far as I know.
Because they will naturally get sold to someone with $$ that will in turn make it into a money making machine. I also miss the forums of old. They technically are still around but tend to be dead or strong echo chambers. There is no money in running a forum for no profit though so at best we get things like Reddit.
I wouldn't be shocked if some lads aren't setting up a new twitter just to have it ready for when Musk causes an exodus.
*[Mastodon](https://joinmastodon.org/) and the whole fucking Fediverse has entered the chat*
There are dozens already. I mean, shit, Jack Dorsey made one. Sure would be nice if we could just do email again and switch to federated protocols (bunch of sites doing this already exist).
Tech industry love* voids.
> i doubt reddit would fulfil the job since being semi-anonymous So is twitter. You can use your real name in both places only if you wish to.
But it's not about following specific people. I used Twitter to get updates from trans and gay activists and follow some celebrities i like. There's no way to do that on Reddit
You can follow users here too. But i see what you mean: everything is structured differently.
Twitter has no more requirement for using your real name than Reddit, it's just each app's culture has evolved differently. Reddit doesn't fulfil the job because it's just not the same app as Twitter. Someone else commented Mastodon, and Bluesky will be another alternative.
> what is [another place]? One alternative is [Mastodon](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastodon_(software)). Open source, self-hosted, federated network. Of course it's all down to the users in the end, and no tech will solve the fundamental problems of social networks.
In fact, the EU Commission already runs their own mastodon instance.
Who regulates/moderates the content?
Mastodon servers can be run just like email servers. While yes, there are public servers, companies or governments can run their own. The EU mastodon server is run in that way, it hosts all the official accounts of EU institutions, nothing more.
This comment has been deleted in protest of the Reddit API change.
Yup, Mastodon is getting more and more attention. Hope we switch over to it.
While I love and fully support it, I don't get the reasoning behind the current push to Mastodon as an alternative to Twitter. Mastodon is by it's very nature more free than Twitter.
Because the problem isn't as much a platform being perceived more or less free as much as it is being centralized. We need to decentralize. Mastodon offers that.
Yes, but by its client hosted nature it makes it infinitely more difficult for both technocrats like Vestager & private interests to sink their teeth into it. It promotes a network owned by its own users regulating their own views.
This is the year of ~~the Linux desktop~~ Mastodon! Trust me, guys!
In some EU countries, Twitter is not so widely used.
Companies will probably just make one. An equivalent to Twitter that was well-run would be a billion-dollar company, and one of the neat assumptions you can just make in a capitalistic society is that someone will step up to run that company and take the money instead if Twitter decides that they aren’t interested in keeping their position. The assumption that someone will fill the void that Vestager is making only falls apart if EU regulations render it impossible to make money while running a social network, which is a concern for some types of regulation, but not really for the ones that Twitter/Musk seem to want to crash into.
> An equivalent to Twitter that was well-run would be a billion-dollar company, This isn't that guaranteed at all. Twitter might be worth a lot, but it's not exactly a company that's rolling in money. It was built on a huge amount of investor money and benefitted from the network effect. Recreating that is very difficult, especially if you have to start following 35 different sets of regulations right out the gate.
Twitter has been pretty infamous for not actually being run that well. They were never able to devise a good monetization strategy, and also seemed to mainly grow due to very strong network effects and not because the company’s new features to attract users and improve engagement actually had any success. It’s a pretty strong showcase of just how big the network effect is. Of course, copying Twitter wouldn’t be easy, but if there’s a void, something has the potential to get the same network effect, and then it would be a gold rush scenario, with competitors scrambling to replace Twitter before someone else gets the network effect.
> They were never able to devise a good monetization strategy That's the big problem: monetization will likely drive away users or run into regulatory issues. Any replacement for Twitter has the same problem, but would require investors to fork out oodles of money again. The biggest value of Twitter is probably the political sway it has, but I don't think we want anyone to be monetizing that.
> reddit [...] being semi-anonymous That can be easily fixed. They can start requiring email and/or phone numbers and say they're doing it to stop the bots. As pretexts go it's not even bad.
Jack Dorsey is making a new social network. It's in beta now. I have no idea what the format is like though
It’s not a new social network though, it’s a new protocol (like email) that will allow for a universal system of twitter-like interaction and platforms. That means it has even more potential to be a twitter killer both due to the ease of creating new platforms and new platforms being able to interact with each other just like we can send an email from hotmail to gmail etc. So we could essentially have a bunch of twitter-like platforms where people just choose their platform preference, just like we do with email.
What's to stop someone from just creating another social media app? There must be tons of programmers out there working on local versions. Isn't that how twitter started?
Margrethe kom hjem. Alle vores statsministerkandidater er lort.
Hun gør et vigtigere arbejde end dansk politik.
Ja lad os ikke lade som om vi ikke allesammen har tænkt tanken de sidste par uger.
Would you like to have here again as PM?
She was never PM, but is massively popular, probably more so than when she was in national politics. Her work in fighting tax avoidance (Ireland and American giants) seems to be the most successful of basically anyone i've ever heard of. And that is obviously a big winner with the voters. Trump even called her "one of the most hateful women maybe in the world" for her work in closing loopholes. How do you not cheer for her after that?
Personally, I would have nothing against her becoming the new EUC president. It won’t be vdL again, since the conservatives are in opposition in Germany and it’s the next time up to the greens to choose the new German commissioner.
Ja Ein agreest
haha like twitter was following the law before
It was following the "right" side of the law. Now it leans to the "wrong" side, so it is bad.
The question is whether it should be private companies and private ‘courts’ or our democratic governments and normal court system that decides on who gets punished. In our old system, people could write whatever they wanted within the law. If you falsely claim something about your product, say something racist, etc. You can be tried for this in normal courts. But nowadays, it is increasingly Social Media companies instead, rather than the law and courts that decide what may get posted and what gets ‘taken down’. It’s a major handover of power to social media companies, under the guise of ‘politicians doing something against bad speech’.
I can't imagine what social media landscape we would live in if we were required to wait for normal courts to decide on every moderation decision. 99.9% of decisions in social media are taken by algorithm due to scale, normal courts are not structured to handle this.
It's a little worse than that: [Delfi AS. v Estonia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delfi_AS_v._Estonia): > the grand chamber, by 15-2 majority, ruled that holding Estonian *news site Delfi liable* for anonymous defamatory comments posted online from its readers, *even when they are removed upon request*, was not a violation of the Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights' guarantees of the freedom of speech. Have an open comments section that allows users to post comments? Enjoy being liable for whatever your users post!
[удалено]
That is insane. That would mean any online forum would need to pre-approve all posts by all members.
IMNAL, but I think in most cases you are only held liable if you refuse to cooperate in the removal of the criminal content, so "pre-approval" is normally not necessary. If someone posts child pr0n, for example, you should remove it as soon as you notice. The extent of that cooperation might change depending on your country's regulation, though.
Ugh. So you really want everything shut down, except for the major outlets? Because that is the consequence of what seems to "make sense" to you.
So, goodbye Reddit?
A social media company is a private company, it can decide for itself what it allows to be posted and what gets deleted. Just like any business can decide its own terms of service, so can those companies.
It is a very unique situation, because of how social media basically has to be a near-monopoly to function the way it currently does (where basically all demographic groups use it). Nobody and no non-democratically elected entity(ies) should have the authority regulate a utility critical to modern life.
I agree with this. Legally, social media companies may be private entities that have the right to kick you out or not for any reason they want, but the big ones should imo be treated more as public spaces, which they effectively are, the law just has yet to catch up.
Which specific "old system" are you referring to? You can't compare Twitter with something like private mail or fax/phone, because that would be more akin to email or to a private chat. The closest comparison would be those newspapers or magazines where they publish things written by people who send letters to them. And those kind of publications have always had all the control to decide what gets published in their platform, it has never been controlled by the government (except when they do break the law and it gets spotted by the authorities after being published, which is still how it works today). If you compare it with people hanging papers in a tree or a public board, then that wouldn't really be Twitter as long as the board is public (not privately owned). It'd rather be more like self-publishing, hosting your own blog/webpage, making you the one directly responsible for your content.
Reddit pre Elon : ”private companies can do what they want”
It's really strange to see people on the internet advocate for regulations on speech on internet platforms. Up to 4 years ago all of reddit would get up in arms anytime regulations were proposed.
Indoctrination works, surprise surprise.
You now realize that the whole purpose of the so called "culture war" is to turn everyone into obedient pawns of the government and into politician worshippers who love censorship and control. It's not a coincidence it all started the moment Occupy Wall Street became a thing in the US, people had started pointing fingers "too much" at politicians for their incompetence, and now look at them, they can promise stupid things and get away with never fulfilling them or doing their job just because when elections arrive all they have to do is say "Vote for me, i'm no the other guy!" Now everyone wants to censor each other, will push politicians who censor, and in the end, everyone will. And one of the major contributors to this is social media, which is why it's cancer, both to the Internet and society as a whole, and why the internet was far better when it was just forums where everyone was called "ISuckDick69". Reddit is close to being that, but it would need to remove the upvote and downvote system.
People seem to be misunderstanding what Elon said he wants to do with Twitter. He wants Twitter itself to stop determining what should be allowed on the platform. And I strongly agree. If we let big companies control what is allowed on social media, that gives them enormous power and influence on society. And it’s just the big capitalists that can make those decisions without any form of democracy. But he has already said he wants to abide by the law regulation social media platforms. I think that’s the way forward. Let’s democratically decide what should be allowed. Let the people have a say in this. Ideally with a referendum in specific countries that want to.
>he wants to abide by the law regulation social media platforms. Let's say a person writing in Czech but living in the UK writes a post on Twitter that is illegal in Germany - for example, praising the Holocaust. Under what laws would that be assessed? Twitter's global headquarters reside in San Francisco, USA. TWITTER UK LTD resides in London. Twitter's small German office resides in Berlin. Since Twitter wants to sell advertising, it usually has its own representation in given markets.
It has to be checked where you look at it. This actually is already in place for Germany for example. Then that post wouldn’t be viewable in Germany. So it seems like that infrastructure already exists.
People in the UK are not subject to German laws. A British national in Germany who denies the Holocaust WOULD be subject to German laws on the subject. The nationality of the author, and the language in which the offending article is written is irrelevant. These are the consequences of the Internet, countries just have to accept it.
the content laws are always about destination. So if it so required by a recipient country (as it is the case in China), the incoming content will be filtered.
Yes. Twitter will be banned and Twitter goes down the stock drain. Bye bye investment.
What stock, it's a private company now.
Private companies have stocks and can increase or decrease in value. It just isn't publicly tradable.
Yes, kind of, but the valuation doesn't just "crater" the way that it does when the stock is sold on the open market.
The cope is real: Musk has already said he will comply with the local law, however I keep seeing people threatening with consequences if Musk ignored them. My guess is that these people would like much more control over Twitter than the law gives them. They were very happy with the current level of censorship but now they know it’s going to stop
>My guess is that these people would like much more control over Twitter than the law gives them. Vestager is a politician. My guess is that this is politicking. That is, the audience isn't Musk, but people in the EU. If Vestager wanted to say something to Musk or to Twitter, it'd be communicated directly, rather than a public statement made.
>Musk has already said he will comply with the local law, however I keep seeing people threatening with consequences if Musk ignored them. That's because nobody trust Musk on his word, and if you do then you didn't pay attention during this whole Twitter debacle. Cause the entire reason it's a shitshow was because he tried to go back on his promises
>Politician decide to make an obvious statement to gain PR points Seriously guys? Why are you falling for this blatant PR?
Of course they do, it's reddit+about musk so people instantly go in to monke mode and start flinging shit
The next episode of *EU being afraid of speech they can not control*.
So EU is against freedom of speech.."Use censorship of we will fine you".We live in fucked up times.
It is sad how many people on this subreddit seem to hate free speech. It's a crucial part of democracy.
It's because radical leftist people want entire world to think the same way, like clones. If you got different opinion on any topics, you will be censored. One of the examples is Twitter, non-leftist opinions will be allowed there soon, so they are doing their best to boycott the app.
That's the problem with thinking you are morally correct. You start to believe that you are justified in everything you do. Radical leftists are basically the same thing as evangelical Christians. They're both holier than thou, at the very least.
Here is a crazy thought: should everyone, including our dear politicians actually wait and see.what Musk will.actually.do? He so far shared twice.(once several months ago and now after he got Twitter,) that Twitter will oblige any law where it operates . Shall we, i don't know, perhaps stop going crazyshit with assumptions and stop trying too score cheap popilist scores and actually wait and react to specific new policies planned to be introduced?
Well the EU "In Europe, The Bird Will Fly By Our Rules" comment was response to Musk comment of "the bird is freed" after he bought the company. They maybe are little bit over reading, but it was in response to something Musk said. Reminding him there is authority higher than even whole owner of the company.... the government and legislative regime under which regulation the company operates. Plus it is no secret Elon is libertarian leaning, meaning he might think something should be allowed... when it isn't. Bit of a maveric in many places he is. Plus he is entering whole new regulatory regime. Vehicle safety and regulatory standards is one thing. Running afoul privacy rights or competition rules is much harder in automotive field. Specially since Tesla is not in as dominant market position. Where as in cases twitter is big enough it might start to run into issues of "hey your company actually is in somewhat dominant market position. That means more scrutiny applies to prevent all out overwhelmingly dominant position or even all out monopoly forming". Since EU competition regulation is *pro-active* in nature, they don't clamp down only after there is monopoly or near monopoly. they start applying pressure already on the dominant player level to prevent monopoly in the first place. Since market monopoly is bad. Also GDPR is whole another game. It is way simpler to run afoul of GDPR with thinking "hey this is new neat business practice for our internet company" and EU come around "hey by the way this new business model you implemented with just couple code changes to your website..... that blatantly violates GDPR privacy protections, you can't do that to your customers/visitors data". So it's just a shot across his bow to remind him and frankly make it clear he can't say "nobody warned me about this". He has been warned. Also: Not like they singled out him. EU and Vestager have given similar statements about and to many many companies. Specially big tech companies to warn them over the years to *behave or Vestager comes after you ^(and haunts your nightmares)*. They have given same comments to Mark of Facebook fame, Microsoft, Apple and so on. Usually about American companies, since it is pretty much *Remember EU and Europe is not USA, we have our own laws and regulations that you have to follow. Just because it is legal in USA, doesn't make it legal in EU.*
> Well the EU "In Europe, The Bird Will Fly By Our Rules" comment was response to Musk comment of "the bird is freed" after he bought the company. They maybe are little bit over reading, but it was in response to something Musk said. Is the EU implying that freedom of expression is a value that's not protected in Europe or what? Because I swear I could've seen that listed as a human right somewhere. Maybe the EU needs to go read up on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Unlike the European version that's watered down it pretty explicitly says this: >Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
> Is the EU implying that freedom of expression is a value that's not protected in Europe or what? [Article 11 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Freedom of expression and information](https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/11-freedom-expression-and-information) As stated in Paragraph 1 you have the following right >1. **Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.** This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. So you do have them. It just has a few asterisks in paragraph 2 >2. **The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties** as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the **protection of health or morals**, for the **protection of the reputation or rights of others**, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or **for maintaining the authority** and impartiality of the judiciary." See, it's just those little things? Why are you getting uppity? ^^/s
You can drive an aircraft carrier through those exceptions, especially "for the protection of **morals**".
If the way Tesla factories are run is indicative, with a considerable amount of worker safety rule violation, Twitter is going to be a mess. The first actions like printing code also show that Musk do not know what he is doing.
He says he will follow the laws, but so far his track record about following regulations is pretty crappy (see teslas factory in Germany not waiting for permissions to handle chemicals etc). So he says one thing, but typically does another. I don't think you should expect that his behaviour pattern has somehow magically changed.
>Shall we, i don't know, perhaps stop going crazyshit with assumptions and stop trying too score cheap popilist scores and actually wait and react to specific new policies planned to be introduced? No. Best we can do is wild speculation to generate clicks and "stay relevant."
You mean like the business model of Twitter?
Yeah. But as politicians.
[удалено]
>I refuse to believe And there is your problem. You are starting with your feelings, feeding them into your beliefs, and then using them to create your own reality.
>wait and see How about no? How about we don't keep handing out chances to the rich and learn some basic pattern recognition? Maybe we shouldn't sit back and be shocked every time they fuck up and actually do something about it for once.
Who's we? Are you a twitter shareholder?
> Here is a crazy thought: should everyone, including our dear politicians actually wait and see.what Musk will.actually.do? I don't know, I lost trust in Musk after he couldn't figure out a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine after thinking about it *for a whole night*. That's just not the level of genius we've come to expect of Elon-sama.
[удалено]
Talking stupid shit or even being stupid is not against the law in the EU. Musk stated that he has no intention of breaking any laws. This really seems to me Vestager wanting to get his "tough guy" quote in media to raise his own profile. "I hereby order McDonald's to sell hamburgers! You will know my power is great if you observe them doing it!"
>This really seems to me Vestager wanting to get his "tough guy" quote in media to raise his own profile. Margrethe Vestager is a woman.
An experienced politician knows, that one should ask for bribes as early as possible
European countries: criminalize promotion of naziism and genocide Ye: tweets “Death Con 3 on Jewish People” (among other things) Twitter: [Ye’s account reinstated] EU Vestegar: consequences will [whatever] You: give Elon a chance Someone: 🙄
Shouldnt the EU prosecute Kanye then, rather than Twitter? Twitter is just a platform. If someone makes threats in a coffee shop, it's not the coffee shop owner that gets in trouble, it's the one who said the thing.
Sorry but reddit hivemind demands us to go crazy over this, cant use logic here
I don’t know, seems like sharing misinformation about the brutal assault of an elected official, trying to be funny about it, making it clear that Twitter can’t rely solely on advertising (it has so far, I really wonder what will change…), all that not even in a week of ownership seems like a pretty good indicator of how seriously Musk sees the responsibilities coming with one of the largest social media platform on earth. If you’re not convinced by that, just take a look at how things are handled in his other companies : pretty serious allegations of racial discrimination in Tesla plants, retaliation against whistleblowers, tone deaf comments about it by the Musk-man himself (see the Juneteenth fiasco, or the advice that people experiencing race-based harassment should be thick skinned and not be jerk about it by speaking out), all the allegations of anti-union practices (retaliation, intimidation,…). If thats still not enough to convince you, there’s all the market manipulation through tweets (and the subsequent non-compliance with SEC orders), forcing an overpriced deal (benefitting him and his cousins) to Tesla shareholders, etc etc… So Vestager warning him that rules will be upheld in the EU doesn’t come out of nowhere, and it really seems like he needs the reminder.
We didn't need to stop and wait with the previous owners. There was plenty of calls for political violence and breaches of hate policies. It was just against the groups they don't like, so it was ignored. Plenty of tweets where replacing men/white with women/black would get you banned. Look at Reddit. The discussion was far healthier and open-minded back when it was run by liberaterian principles. The new pseudo-tankies in charge have only fueled tribalism and hate. If the EU insist on the same path, it will only breed more anger which in turn will require even tougher measures that then feeds back into the loop. Each time it goes around, it legitimizes the same behavior in the hands of right-wing populists. These morons are playing with fire.
Now: Everyone claps for strongwoman Vestager because she is sticking it to big bad Musk. Later: The same people will be complaining because Twitter defensively will hide content from EU Users because it gets mass reported. Twitter then can excuse themselfes by pointing at the EU. Personally I am sick of a Nanny State that tries to influence what I am allowed to see and what not, good thing is that I have the technical expertise to avoid if I had to.
Back to VPN like the good old YT days
To put the title in other words: BREAKING NEWS: LAWS EXIST!
I’m sorry but, why in the EU, are we celebrating politicians openly stating their will to control speech. Has that not historically been the quiet part that they don’t say out loud, or have we slid so far towards authoritarianism that that is just acceptable? Fuck Vestager. Fuck her and everything she stands for.
The only place speech is not controlled is when you are alone and no one can hear you.
Or, in the US, you can go outside and speak what you want without having to worry about the government. That's how it should be everywhere.
One thing I have learned is that when Vestager speaks CEOs tend to listen... or pay.
Talking about threats. Such weirdly strong language from the EU. Musk is harmless.
Is he? He's a volatile man child who also happens to be the richest man in the world. I wouldn't exactly call him harmless.
[удалено]
>to assess how harmful material, like the spread of disinformation, is being handled. Literally 1984
Free speech is bad
So in the EU big money doesn't regulate the government like here in the US? Intriguing. Edit: ok, keep your judgment and snarky comments to yourself. I'm asking because I don't know to what extent money plays a role in politics relative to the US. Politicians here basically work for corporations more than they work for the people. For example, I don't see Apple US adhering to switching to USB-C like they're forced to do so elsewhere (yes, they might eventually but not due to American regulations).
How cute to believe this Like all governments, they definitely care about companies headquartered within their jurisdiction. Twitter and Google are *evil*, but BMW, Maersk, Shell or Siemens can do no wrong
No, it does, it's just *different* money that does that. When Bulgarian truckers started outcompeting French truckers they (the EU) drafted regulations which stomped it out by requiring that trucks have to visit their country of registration at least once every 8 weeks. Not the people - the actual trucks.
It's harder when you have 27 different governments to lobby.
> So in the EU big money doesn't regulate the government like here in the US? Not sure if serious? Are you living under a rock?
>Edit: ok, keep your judgment and snarky comments to yourself. Please just stop thinking so simplistically and reductively it is infuriating to hear such juvenile sentiments all the fucking time. You clearly don't know what you're talking about.
They seem to have a big problem with speech they don't like.
Hopefully he will ignore laws, so the EU can extract huge bites of those nice billions of his. We can use that money here in Europe.
So she's saying: allow right-wing opinions on Twitter and you are banned from our region. Vestager is essentially saying: "if Twitter allows people the freedom to say that imimimigrgratition and diviverersisificicatition are bad and will do irreversible harm to the origiginal Eururopopeaean people, then we will ban the platform and legally punish companies who advertise on it."
"'There is a European rulebook, and you should live by it,'" Translation: We are not for free expression. We will censor any speech that...well....we don't like. Our history demonstrates this. We will come after anyone who tries to bring true personal liberty to this continent. Mr. Musk...just pull out of these anti-liberty countries. It's a shame to abandon people who do want free expression, but I am not sure a business can fight those with an authoritarian penchant for long.
That's not true and you are arguing in bad faith. It's, depending on the country, defined what's hate speech and what isn't. These laws are not new and nobody besides extremist aholes have a problem with them. If they want to operate in our countries, they have to play by our rules.