• danc4498@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    135
    ·
    3 months ago
    • Brazil asked Elon to ban 7 fascist accounts spreading disinformation
    • Elon refused pretending it was a free speech issue even though he complied multiple times with similar requests from right wing govts

    Gotta say, this is new information to me. I’ve briefly looked at the stories and the banning of twitter, but I never realized this was entirely because Elon wouldn’t ban accounts as he does for right wing government.

    Elon seems like a kinda shitty guy.

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        3 months ago

        I mean it genuinely is because of the “kinda” and “seems”

        “Elon is a shitty guy” is one of the coldest takes out there at this point

    • mosiacmango@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      He censors way more than old twitter, and is way less transparent about it.

      Old twitter complied with 51% of legal requests, Elon’s twitter is at 71%. Old twitter complied with 53% of government take down requests, Elon’s is at 76%.

      Old twitter also used to post a high detailed transparency report every 6 months. This one from Elon’s twitter is light on detail, and the first in 2+ years.

      So he’s a lying liar and even his own data proves it.

  • axx@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    But remember kids, he’s some sort of business and tech genius!

    • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Definitely has managed to invest in some incredibly profitable stuff but he also says and does the absolutely stupidest shit imaginable. It’s astounding

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        a lot of that profit is derived from a set of rug pulls that only work because he had the money of the victims to keep pushing his image in the media

  • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    3 months ago

    He wants Twix to be Truth Social, but also profitable, and doesn’t understand why he can’t have it both ways.

    • GardenVarietyAnxiety@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Back in late 2022 I was in an argument with my (adult) nephew about how the government isn’t limiting free speech on Twitter. I was explaining how “the free market” is deciding whether Elon will sink or swim. He just could not understand how the government -wasn’t- responsible.

      …idfk

      (Yes, there were some Governmental take down requests, but none of them seemed very sus to me)

      • SacredHeartAttack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        40
        ·
        3 months ago

        I had a similar discussion with some people at a barber shop back when Pre-Elon Twitter banned Trump. They were complaining about free speech and I asked if they knew what it actually meant (in the US). When I explained that we are ONLY guaranteed free speech from the gov’t, and that Twitter was a private business and could ban whoever they want, the same way this barber shop could tell someone not to ever come back everyone got real quiet like “oh shit I have to rethink my whole world view”. I actually got thanked at another time by one employee for telling them how it actually works.

    • Obinice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      What’s this got to do with Twix? I love a good Twix…

      Fuck me, now I gotta go buy a Twix. And a Lion, do they still make those? God they were the best.

        • Obinice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I had no idea Twix used to be called Raider, I’ve learned something new!

          Snickers used to be called Marathon, I know that one :-)

          • Enkrod@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            Twix was called Raider in many european countries, above all all german speaking countries, don’t ask me why. When they got renamed to Twix in 1991 about 70% of all countries that offered the bar already called it Twix.

            The renaming happened with the slogan “Raider heißt jetzt Twix, … sonst ändert sich nix” broadly “Raider is now called Twix, … nothing else changes”

            The Slogan ofcourse was used by many german speaking comedians and satirists when it came to Twitter… “Twitter heißt jetzt X, … sonst ändert sich nix.”, with the added bonus that a lot changed, for the worse, underlining Muskian lies.

            • Obinice@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              Oooh so there’s actually much more to it than meets the eye! Damn. Thanks for taking the time to explain :-)

              I bet this information will be mixed with my COVID fever dreams and is going to remain lodged in my brain as core knowledge somehow forever :P

        • daed@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I like Xitter still better. I dunno about his current ties to China but in Chinese you pronounce xi as shi AFAIK.

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    3 months ago

    He acts literally like a fucking toddler.

    Perhaps even a toddler in a tantrum.

    • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Now that’s just kind of rude toward toddlers. He acts like what he is… a Ketamine addled, narcissistic billionaire, who got lucky in life and thinks he crafted his own destiny all by his own hands.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        3 months ago

        Fair enough, fair enough. Toddlers are way more pleasant than him, even when they’ve shat their pants. I apologise to all toddlers.

      • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Ketamine is a dissociative which strips away what you know about things, sort of like how a child doesnt know things. So in a way, he’s actually a toddler.

      • freddydunningkruger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        3 months ago

        X/Twitter will soon be making more changes to the block button, with CEO Elon Musk confirming that all public posts will be viewable going forward, even to those who have been blocked

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          I thought most stuff was viewable even without account. Doesn’t seem like a big deal if you can view their post but not interact with it since I would’ve thought others interacting with you was what you wanted to block them from doing anyway.

          • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            If you’re blocking users left and right that you know spread misinformation, you will still see their posts. No way you can keep track of the usernames in your head, and now you may hear a misinformation or two and assume it to be a fact.

            • naught101@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              I think they are just changing it so the blocked user can still see the blocker’s posts, not the other way around.

                • DillyDaily@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Wow, that was not made clear to me. Fortunately I’ve never needed to block anyone specifically from my profiles/content (it’s the other way around, I don’t want to see some other users stuff)

                  But good to know if I had a stalker or something, blocking them doesn’t mean they are blocked from my content, it means they’re blocked from contact.

                  I totally would have assumed blocking someone on various social media platform went both ways in terms of what’s visible to each other.

        • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          Isn’t that how it works on most platforms though? You can see the account you’ve been blocked by, but can’t interact with them.

          • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 months ago

            On reddit it stopped the blocked person from seeing your account and comments.
            Or it used to. Or I’m misremembering.

        • joenforcer@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Which is not even a big deal because blocked users could just create a separate account to view posts they’re blocked from anyway.

    • joenforcer@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      No they aren’t. They are changing how it works, in a way that is mostly immaterial to the user. That is not even close to completely removing.

      • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yep.

        From the sounds of it:

        Before: if you block somebody, they cannot see your stuff.

        After: if you block somebody, they can still visit your profile.

        Usually, when you block someone, they can no longer see your feed; instead, it’s replaced with a message stating that they’re blocked. Now, they can freely browse your feed; they’re just not allowed to interact or comment on your posts.

        https://www.makeuseof.com/x-block-feature-poor-job-blocking-people/

        NGL Elon’s excitement sounds like he was blocked by a lot of people and Daddy Musk will not have closed doors in this household! 😮‍💨

        • Sanctus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          3 months ago

          Stalkers and abusers rejoice!

          Seriously, if you are on twitter and have had a relationship with someone like this do not post on your account or they will find you now.

        • Fiona
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          To be fair though: While circumventing that was as easy as logging out, the inability to see things while logged in was kinda stupid and gave people a false perception of privacy. In that setting that change is just a case of being honest.

          With the ability to view posts without account largely removed, it’s a bit of a different story, but I have to admit that if it’s public on Xitter, it’s still kinda public, so hiding it still kinda missing the poin.

      • somtwo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        No longer being able to hide your public posts from specific users seems hardly immaterial to me.

      • Korne127@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        3 months ago

        Mastodon has more users than Bluesky. (I fear it won’t stay like that for a long time anymore though as Bluesky has a bigger growth rate.)

        • JoJo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          Size doesn’t matter imo, especially not between an organically growing distributed user-ran network and a corporate Twitter wannabe who, despite calls of wanting to decentralise, basically have 99% of users on its main instance

    • Serinus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      Because Mastodon needs a reliable instance with a catchy domain name. Maybe even the slightest bit of advertising.

      Someone reputable could make a real Twitter competitor for about $2m a year these days.

      I’d say Mozilla, but they just took all their social media funding away and threw it at AI. Genius.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Which don’t exactly have the name recognition of The New York Times.

        • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          3 months ago

          I would worry that Google will simply discontinue the product abruptly. Google is unreliable with product longevity.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s rather see NYTimes get into it. Even if they time allow outside signups on their instance.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I’d say Mozilla, but they just took all their social media funding away and threw it at AI.

        Nobody was using their instance from what I heard. So a bit of a wasted effort.

        What sort of money are they throwing at AI? I only know about the sidebar and that’s basically just a tab to a website of your choosing. Couldn’t have been expensive.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 months ago

          They never allowed people to use it. There was a wait-list. It never opened afaik outside of Mozilla people.

    • makyo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      3 months ago

      Mastodon has serious UX problems that even other federated networks don’t have. I’m pretty well tech literate and love Lemmy, for instance, but I just couldn’t ever get Mastodon to stick for me, like it just didn’t have the right feel and wasn’t fun to use. And if it’s not working for me then it’s never going to take off with a more general audience.

      Bluesky is a lot better. It still has some issues that I feel keep it from fully replacing Twitter, especially Twitter before Elon screwed it up. But it does manage to keep me checking it, even though it’s probably only once or twice a week max.

    • mke@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 months ago

      I think one of the biggest reasons is that the Fediverse is often a pain to get into and sometimes a pain to use.

      Bluesky and Threads “just work.”

      Some people say it’s marketing and in Threads’ case I can believe it, but I haven’t seen any example of large marketing campaign by Bluesky.

      • Korne127@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        How is Bluesky easier to use when it’s literally also federated? And you can just create an account on any Mastodon instance like mastodon.world or mastodon.social and start using it.

        • Lanusensei87@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          3 months ago

          It may be easier because Bluesky already made the choice for you, you don’t need to pick an instance, the default is Bluesky Social and that’s it, if you want a different one you can search it or make one. It removes that tiny mental block of having to commit to a server you don’t know if you will like.

        • mke@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          That’s inaccurate and reductive. ATproto and ActivityPub do not federate the same way, and how they work greatly affects how users interact with the entire ecosystem.

          On Mastodon, pick the wrong instance and there’s content you’ll never see, migration isn’t complete, discovery is so bad they started a new initiative to try fixing it, instances have their own cultures, and so on.

          Bluesky has issues, some I’d consider critical, but they’re not directly user-facing for the most part. Make an account, you get the same experience as everyone else.

          edit: Sorry, I have this issue where I try to be concise, yet feel like I end up being rude. I get your confusion, but they’re quite different. Hopefully this helped; I can elaborate if you want.

      • gandalf_der_12te@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I wonder whether it was the right decision to not federate with Threads.

        On the one hand, yes, they would have caused a lot of problematic content, but on the other hand, it would have meant a lot of new users, and that would have livened up the place a bit. I guess.

        Maybe we could do a switch in the user profile for Lemmy where it says “show Thread posts in All posts”. Or something.

    • IntheTreetop@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sadly, Mastodon had its shot during the pandemic and blew it. The non-tech savvy didn’t understand how federation worked and they marketed themselves very poorly.

      • stinerman [Ohio]@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        I agree, but there was also the problem of Mastodon has no marketing budget. Before Musk closed the sale on Twitter, they had 2 full time employees, IIRC.

      • mke@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yet, Bluesky didn’t even support video posts until two weeks ago. Many other highly requested features are still missing. To what extent does the success of each platform come down to money? What did Bluesky do with a larger budget to get an edge?

        • stinerman [Ohio]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          My recollection is that they advertised and got Important People™ to post there as part of their invite-only beta. Don’t quote me on this, but I believe they paid some of these people to create accounts and post there. Not sure if that was a rumor or not.

          • mke@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I looked around, but was unable to find more about this. Until something new comes up, I’m assuming it’s just a rumor.

      • Korne127@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Why replace horrible company with bad company run by literally THE guy that let the prior company become horrible instead of replacing it with good non-profit network?

        • stinerman [Ohio]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 months ago

          FOMO. More celebrities are on Bluesky than Mastodon and people don’t care enough about open protocols and so forth to forego that. If Taylor Swift was only on some Fediverse-enabled platform and nothing else, people would come here in droves. Taylor Swift does not post on Mastodon so people don’t want an account here. Replace Taylor Swift for anyone of any sort of popularity and ask the same questions.

          I do wonder who the most famous person in the world is that exclusively posts on a Fediverse-platform. It could very well be Eugen Rochko, who probably has about a 0.05% name recognition throughout the world.

        • mke@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Are you talking about Dorsey? Because if so, he left Bluesky as he didn’t like their focus on moderation.

          Not that it matters much, I sincerely doubt most users look up such details before joining anything. It’s all about the experience.

    • uranibaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 months ago

      Perhaps Elon ran his mouth, was forced to buy Twitter because signed papers and MBS saw an oppertunity to remove Twitter from the scene?

    • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 months ago

      Why would MBS be cool with giving Elon $22 BILLION for his fuckup?

      Same reason idiots kept throwing money at trump back when his resume was just a list of bankrupcies (several hotels, an airline and a casino), moneyed people are way stupider than we think.

  • SouthFresh@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is a hint at why he wanted involvement in PayPal and wants X to be a financial service. You can’t take away money from a system he controls.