[Just_Me_D]

I’ve read online where Elon Musk is considering purchasing Twitter now that he it’s largest stakeholder. To me he seems in favor of letting people express themselves openly.

With that being said, are you in favor of him buying Twitter?

[kataran]

I follow Elon Musk and support his vision but I’m not sure why he wants to buy Twitter but as long as he has a future use that is not obvious then I’m all for it

[Thud Hardsmack]

I’m as much of a fan of Elon buying Twitter as I am of him wanting to put internet interfaces in peoples’ brains. Which is to say not in the slightest.

[Ed7789]

I’m pretty against it. I don’t like the idea of one (or a limited few) individual to have control over a major social network. Remember Facebook? This feels like this will give us a clone of that.

The good news is that social media in general is on track of being heavily regulated, because of all the hate speech and disinformation that was propagated by those means.

[gnirkatto]

No!
Any more unconditional 'free speech', plus the retweet feature, plus basically no control over hate speech, lies and conspiracies is giving me goose bumps (more than it does already). This is one of the things that causes the problems of todays world, and my understanding is that he wants to extend this even further.

[Wotchered]

I don’t use it, I don’t care about it. The more Musk extends himself the more chance there is of his giant pyramid schemes coming unravelled.

[Not Quite Right]

I think instead of buying Twitter he should be doing just about anything else with his billions, like paying his taxes would be a good start ...

[Annie_M]

I’m not at all sure about Elon Musk buying Twitter!

[Just_Me_D]

No!
…. basically no control over hate speech, lies and conspiracies is giving me goose bumps (more than it does already). This is one of the things that causes the problems of todays world, and my understanding is that he wants to extend this even further.

Free speech should not be suppressed in my opinion, and the decision to listen to it should be up to the individual. Ignoring or taking steps to suppress a different viewpoint will only widen the division. In addition, “Hate speech”, “conspiracies” and “misinformation” will end up equating to anything a majority deem as such.

An example: you personally witness a murder and you try to report to authorities the person who’s responsible. However, 10 other people contradicts your truthful report and make it seem as if you were purposely spreading misinformation.

Believe it or not, but some people don’t want certain truths to be told. You can best believe “some” things currently labeled as misinformation is indeed the truth. ….

[Mr Segundus]

Absolutely not. If he were to buy Twitter, it'd turn into a cesspool like Facebook - full of misinformation, lies, conspiracy theories, 2020 election lies, and COVID vaccine lies.

Some things people need to realize:
1) Private websites aren't protected by the First Amendment. They have a ToS that you agree to when you sign up and if you don't abide by the rules, you get suspended. The courts have verified that time and time again.
2) spending money to buy a website to institute your own version of free speech isn't free speech.
3) Musk will find out that if he allows bots and trolls to push their misinformation on Twitter, people will leave. Look how that turned out for Gab, Parler, Truth Social, 4Chan, 8Chan, etc. He will lose money.

[Mr Segundus]

Free speech should not be suppressed in my opinion, and the decision to listen to it should be up to the individual. Ignoring or taking steps to suppress a different viewpoint will only widen the division. In addition, “Hate speech”, “conspiracies” and “misinformation” will end up equating to anything a majority deem as such.

An example: you personally witness a murder and you try to report to authorities the person who’s responsible. However, 10 other people contradicts your truthful report and make it seem as if you were purposely spreading misinformation.

Believe it or not, but some people don’t want certain truths to be told. You can best believe “some” things currently labeled as misinformation is indeed the truth. ….

Free Speech doesn't apply to private websites. The First Amendment only applies to the government.

[Ed7789]

Free Speech doesn't apply to private websites. The First Amendment only applies to the government.

And it doesn’t apply to any other country where Twitter operates.

The first Amendment to my homeland’s Constitution has nothing to do with “freedom of speech”. It has to do with the rights of the Indigenous peoples (post-1982) and territorial changes (pre-1982).

In regards to me, the freedom of expression is a relative freedom enshrined in the the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (to which Royal Assent was given 40 years ago today ). And it still applies to the interactions between persons (natural or moral) and the Crown (understand here, State).
——
On a different, but related note, does Musk want to deal with legislative changes like this one: https://www.socialmedialawbulletin.c...eaming-giants/ and https://justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl...harte/c10.html.

Bill C-10 died when the writs were dropped (I love that name) in August 2021, but it is likely to come back in a reviewed form.

And Canada isn’t alone, the ECJ already ruled that social media content is subject to laws of every country: https://www.independent.ie/business/...-38559877.html

My conclusion: If you want to have a daily headache, buy Twitter, and be ready to have your own hands tied because you’re doing business in hundreds of countries.

——
Edit - 2022-04-17 at 20:53 UTC: The goal of my post is to bring a perspective not centred on the United States of America. More often than not, it seems (to me) that some people seem to extend the USA to the rest of the globe.

[Chuck Finley69]

The idea of a free internet should be to allow everyone or anyone to speak freely. I definitely won't like every other viewpoints, including any type of racism, black, white or any color in between, however as soon as someone attempts to stifle anyone's opinions, it becomes a slippery, dangerous slope of human elites only allowing what they support or believe.

[Up_And_Away]

Who determines what is hate speech, lies, conspiracies? You would be an extraordinary individual if your “goose bumps” seemingly only applied to everything that’s honest, benevolent and doesn’t counter what is conventionally believed.
This may be shocking to hear but conventionally believed truths, that which is hateful, that which is a “conspiracy” ended up ultimately as important changes for humanity. What was also ultimately important for humanity is when all institutions and powerful said X, a few lone voices said Y. But I suppose as long as lone voices that said Y can first be filtered through what you, the powerful and the institutional think shouldn’t be said, it’ll be great for us all.

[grover5]

Who determines what is hate speech, lies, conspiracies? You would be an extraordinary individual if your “goose bumps” seemingly only applied to everything that’s honest, benevolent and doesn’t counter what is conventionally believed.
This may be shocking to hear but conventionally believed truths, that which is hateful, that which is a “conspiracy” ended up ultimately as important changes for humanity. What was also ultimately important for humanity is when all institutions and powerful said X, a few lone voices said Y. But I suppose as long as lone voices that said Y can first be filtered through what you, the powerful and the institutional think shouldn’t be said, it’ll be great for us all.

Yeah. There’s also Jim Jones. Quite a bit actually.

[gnirkatto]

No!
Any more unconditional 'free speech', plus the retweet feature, plus basically no control over hate speech, lies and conspiracies is giving me goose bumps (more than it does already). This is one of the things that causes the problems of todays world, and my understanding is that he wants to extend this even further.

Already when typing this, I expected replies like 'no limits on free speech!', 'who decides on hate speech or lies or conspiracies' etc. etc.
And I wasn't sure I should at all post this. And then I did it anyway.

I'm not against free speech.

I'm against stupidities like 'lizard people taking over', 'the earth is flat' etc. etc. etc. and their instant million-fold distribution, due to their more entertaining and much easier to understand nature, compared to boring and complex scientific processes and findings. And by that, driving the world more and more into an abyss never seen before.

So how do we get this under control, while preserving free speech? Any ideas? This is the debate we should have, regardless of left, right, middle or whatever.

I don't have the solution (has anyone?). But I'm sure Musk doesn't either, and his plans will make everything much worse.

[Mr Segundus]

And it doesn’t apply to any other country where Twitter operates.

The first Amendment to my homeland’s Constitution has nothing to do with “freedom of speech”. It has to do with the rights of the Indigenous peoples (post-1982) and territorial changes (pre-1982).

In regards to me, the freedom of expression is a relative freedom enshrined in the the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (to which Royal Assent was given 40 years ago today ). And it still applies to the interactions between persons (natural or moral) and the Crown (understand here, State).
——
On a different, but related note, does Musk want to deal with legislative changes like this one: https://www.socialmedialawbulletin.c...eaming-giants/ and https://justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl...harte/c10.html.

Bill C-10 died when the writs were dropped (I love that name) in August 2021, but it is likely to come back in a reviewed form.

And Canada isn’t alone, the ECJ already ruled that social media content is subject to laws of every country: https://www.independent.ie/business/...-38559877.html

My conclusion: If you want to have a daily headache, buy Twitter, and be ready to have your own hands tied because you’re doing business in hundreds of countries.

——
Edit - 2022-04-17 at 20:53 UTC: The goal of my post is to bring a perspective not centred on the United States of America. More often than not, it seems (to me) that some people seem to extend the USA to the rest of the globe.

I thought it was pretty clear my post was about the US and criticisms about Twitter from the US.

[Mr Segundus]

Who determines what is hate speech, lies, conspiracies?

Websites that create their own Terms of Service.

[Ed7789]

Well, Twitter has agreed to be sold to Elon Musk: Elon Musk to buy Twitter for $44B US | CBC News

Also, the EU has confirmed that they will regulate social media companies: EU deal targets Big Tech over hate speech, disinformation | CBC News

Let's see how these two realities will play out. ​Takes some popcorn and watches.

[Annie_M]

And it doesn’t apply to any other country where Twitter operates.

The first Amendment to my homeland’s Constitution has nothing to do with “freedom of speech”. It has to do with the rights of the Indigenous peoples (post-1982) and territorial changes (pre-1982).

In regards to me, the freedom of expression is a relative freedom enshrined in the the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (to which Royal Assent was given 40 years ago today ). And it still applies to the interactions between persons (natural or moral) and the Crown (understand here, State).
——
On a different, but related note, does Musk want to deal with legislative changes like this one: https://www.socialmedialawbulletin.c...eaming-giants/ and https://justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl...harte/c10.html.

Bill C-10 died when the writs were dropped (I love that name) in August 2021, but it is likely to come back in a reviewed form.

And Canada isn’t alone, the ECJ already ruled that social media content is subject to laws of every country: https://www.independent.ie/business/...-38559877.html

My conclusion: If you want to have a daily headache, buy Twitter, and be ready to have your own hands tied because you’re doing business in hundreds of countries.

——
Edit - 2022-04-17 at 20:53 UTC: The goal of my post is to bring a perspective not centred on the United States of America. More often than not, it seems (to me) that some people seem to extend the USA to the rest of the globe.

That’s definitely true.

[anon(41073)]

an article written by Einstein in 1949.

In the inaugural May 1949 edition of socialist magazine Monthly Review, Einstein argued that private capital “tends to become concentrated in few hands”, resulting in “an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society”.

“Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education).

[Just_Me_D]

Already when typing this, I expected replies like 'no limits on free speech!', 'who decides on hate speech or lies or conspiracies' etc. etc.
And I wasn't sure I should at all post this. And then I did it anyway.

I'm not against free speech.

I'm against stupidities like 'lizard people taking over', 'the earth is flat' etc. etc. etc. and their instant million-fold distribution, due to their more entertaining and much easier to understand nature, compared to boring and complex scientific processes and findings. And by that, driving the world more and more into an abyss never seen before.

So how do we get this under control, while preserving free speech? Any ideas? This is the debate we should have, regardless of left, right, middle or whatever.

I don't have the solution (has anyone?). But I'm sure Musk doesn't either, and his plans will make everything much worse.

There will always be people who seek attention and likewise, there will always be people who question long held truths. I don’t have a problem with it and it doesn’t mean they’re stupid. There’s almost always a reason behind the stunts. If we take steps to silence or prevent them from expressing themselves because we disagree with them and/or don’t like what they have to say, I can assure you their voices will be heard one way or another.

[Ed7789]

So, it sounds like Musk is backing out of the deal. I’m very unsurprised by this.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/elo...deal-1.6515431

[Wotchered]

Should be entertaining !