Has it also been confirmed that Musk has Asperger's? I recall the only source of that information being Musk, on SNL, the one time.
Sure, it can fit if you want it to, but still seems dubious coming from a shameless attention whore that seems capable of playing every possible victim card in order to soften his growing D. Vader persona.
Full stop. Am Asperger. And I fully understand why I shouldnt run the world.
To the other bit, I am sure he somehow envisions this "town hall" to somehow be a beacon between Mars and Earth. *SOMETHING* like that.
Understood. I just thought we should focus on Musk's particular behavior.
And the "town hall..." well, that's what he'll claim in public, anyway. I suspect the SEC and the ability to say what he wants are his main motives.
I would be interested to hear what his ideas are, if any, to unlock Twitter’s potential but yes my suspicion is he’s simply mad that he keeps getting in trouble for using it and someone as rich as him isn’t used to many external constraints.Understood. I just thought we should focus on Musk's particular behavior.
And the "town hall..." well, that's what he'll claim in public, anyway. I suspect the SEC and the ability to say what he wants are his main motives.
I would be interested to hear what his ideas are, if any, to unlock Twitter’s potential but yes my suspicion is he’s simply mad that he keeps getting in trouble for using it and someone as rich as him isn’t used to many external constraints.
The ‘fire in a crowded theater’ is actually something you can probably do, yes.Potential?
He just wants it to run free...
Scream fire in the theater?
Disinformation foreign and domestic?
Bots?
So Musk is running a pump and dump here. He makes the offer, and twitter stock soars. The board rejects his offer, so he can sell his ~9% at a much higher price than he bought (secretly and technically illegally).
At some point, his various SEC related shenanigans (which is what was a problem for him joining the board) should come back to haunt him. But, there's no accountability in this world so ...
Understood. I just thought we should focus on Musk's particular behavior.
And the "town hall..." well, that's what he'll claim in public, anyway. I suspect the SEC and the ability to say what he wants are his main motives.
Has Twitter ever removed and or blocked one of his posting? Musk getting into trouble on Twitter seems to be more related to government regulations (SEC) which wouldn't change even if he owned Twitter.
Not that I know of. Musk has done some pretty stupid things on Twitter, such as supporting the trucker protests, but I can't recall Twitter deleting his posts or suspending his account.
You clearly haven’t been paying attention to the last decade or so. The better ideas don’t win out, the truth doesn’t trump misinformation and more speech doesn’t mean better debate.
It doesn't - we already know what free speech on social media should mean. They own the platform so free speech is whatever they choose to permit.This is completely true.
Free speech does not guarantee positive outcomes. And we have clearly witnessed human social behavior taking a massive nosedive as mass misinformation became readily available to us all. People latch onto comfortable fantasies rather than... inconvenient truths. It is possible free speech is currently being used as a poison to harm us. And it's a perfectly natural human phenomenon.
What free speech should mean for social media needs a thorough scientific study and a robust public debate.
If our society is even capable of such things at this pint.
It doesn't - we already know what free speech on social media should mean. They own the platform so free speech is whatever they choose to permit.
Elon Musk is free to create his own free speech website if that's what he thinks the market wants but I think he believes it would be a failure so it's better to force Twitter to act how he wants. The thing is he may not realize that Twitter users don't want to be flooded by shitposters.
This is not correct - Twitter is not responsible for the content posted by its users as per Section 230 and it is also permitted to remove any material it wants for any reason.Is Twitter a platform or a publisher?
Platforms get protection from libel and are only allowed to remove explicitly illegal material.
Publishers are fully responsible under defamation law but are allowed to edit and censor as they please.
His unsolicited bid for Twitter probably isn't about Musk being able to say what he wants since he already says what he wants.
This is not correct - Twitter is not responsible for the content posted by its users as per Section 230 and it is also permitted to remove any material it wants for any reason.
Section 230 Is The Subject of The Most Effective Legal Propaganda I've Ever Seen
Here Are Some Resources On What It Really Means, If You Carepopehat.substack.com
It's probably about bringing back more like minded people like other Anti-Vaxxers, and Trump.
How would Musk know that the board will reject his offer? There is a lot of money on the table in this offer at a premium per share.
That is the problem, Twitter gets to decide what side it is on. It should be forced to pick one side and stick to it.
No it shouldn't, it is protected by federal law and the first amendment. They should choose to publish whatever speech they feel like because they have the same freedom of speech that you do.That is the problem, Twitter gets to decide what side it is on. It should be forced to pick one side and stick to it.
No it shouldn't, it is protected by federal law and the first amendment. They should choose to publish whatever speech they feel like because they have the same freedom of speech that you do.
It's a private service - if you don't like how they run their service just don't use it.
Twitter is actually exercising it's rights to "free speech".
Great, so Twitter is a publisher and is responsible for any defamation that it publishes. - Thank you for clearing that up.