Are you saying Musk is a fascist? The guy that’s championing free speech and got rid of all the people that were censoring opinions, and working with government officials to lie about and censor stories?
I guess the word fascist really has lost all meaning with people these days.
If this is your view of Musk then you really need to pay attention. He claims to be fighting for free speech, when it’s so obvious he just pushing his own very specific agenda harder than even the most biased people before him. Honestly I’m surprised people are still around believing the bs about him being in favour of free speech.
Not even remotely the same as what Twitter was doing before he bought it, and no algorithms don’t just hide stuff.
Elon musk isn’t a fascist because he’s done the opposite of what a fascist would do with his platform. Like I said, the word fascist doesn’t mean what it’s now being used as. Ironically it’s the people calling for censorship that are calling other people fascists.
Which makes him even more dangerous. In my personal world all centralized social networks would be put into Musk’s hand and Zucc behind bars for every genocide, election sway and dictator Facebook has enabled and will enable in the future.
The issue is that Twitter, even with Musk hammering nails into it, is still a better social media than Threads. Threads has no way to even limit your timeline to only people you follow or view posts in reverse chronological order. It’s all algorithm and Zuck shoving brands in your face.
Plus Twitter remains one of the last few major havens for NSFW socials, and I doubt Threads will be any more lenient than Instagram’s strict rules.
I’m just really hoping that Mastodon gets more traction, but it feels like the realistic version of David vs Goliath where the little guy gets squashed.
At the same time, with Twitter in its current state, it is basically unusable for social media, since your average account is limited to about 300 - 600 requests, which includes every single interaction and loading of all posts you see.
I think it’s important to realist that it’s not at all about the owner to be evil or benevolent. It is all about what structural and economic incentives exist. A for-profit corporation based on the business model of advertisement is structurally incompatible with some objectives that I - as a netizen - want to achieve (freedom, privacy).
This is also why I don’t agree with those of “it’s a win for decentralized” or “it will bring users”. For me decentralization and other properties (e.g. OpenSource code) are only some necessary conditions to achieve the above abstract and ideological goals.
I don’t know. If we’re comparing shit, some shit is better than other shit. We don’t see farmers fertilizing their fields with duck shit. Nah. They use the good shit - bull shit.
In all honesty, the lawful evil Zucc is better than the chaotic evil Musk, at least for now.
Zucc is a greedy asshole, but I think he knows when to sit back, and let the smarter people make decisions.
Musk is an arrogant, insufferable fuck. Epitome of a know-it-all.
Eh, the whole Metaverse fiasco. But he’s at least not an outspoken Fascist, which makes him somewhat good in today’s dystopian world.
Are you saying Musk is a fascist? The guy that’s championing free speech and got rid of all the people that were censoring opinions, and working with government officials to lie about and censor stories?
I guess the word fascist really has lost all meaning with people these days.
If this is your view of Musk then you really need to pay attention. He claims to be fighting for free speech, when it’s so obvious he just pushing his own very specific agenda harder than even the most biased people before him. Honestly I’m surprised people are still around believing the bs about him being in favour of free speech.
He can push his agenda as much as he want, but he’s not censoring any speech. He’s not silencing anyone. That’s not fascism.
There was this a while ago https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/15/media/twitter-musk-journalists-hnk-intl/index.html
And I think he had something to do the Turkey elections as well?
As long as there are algorithms there is censorship. Censorship mean to hide stuffs for people and that what algorithms do
Not even remotely the same as what Twitter was doing before he bought it, and no algorithms don’t just hide stuff.
Elon musk isn’t a fascist because he’s done the opposite of what a fascist would do with his platform. Like I said, the word fascist doesn’t mean what it’s now being used as. Ironically it’s the people calling for censorship that are calling other people fascists.
Which makes him even more dangerous. In my personal world all centralized social networks would be put into Musk’s hand and Zucc behind bars for every genocide, election sway and dictator Facebook has enabled and will enable in the future.
The issue is that Twitter, even with Musk hammering nails into it, is still a better social media than Threads. Threads has no way to even limit your timeline to only people you follow or view posts in reverse chronological order. It’s all algorithm and Zuck shoving brands in your face.
Plus Twitter remains one of the last few major havens for NSFW socials, and I doubt Threads will be any more lenient than Instagram’s strict rules.
I’m just really hoping that Mastodon gets more traction, but it feels like the realistic version of David vs Goliath where the little guy gets squashed.
At the same time, with Twitter in its current state, it is basically unusable for social media, since your average account is limited to about 300 - 600 requests, which includes every single interaction and loading of all posts you see.
I think it’s important to realist that it’s not at all about the owner to be evil or benevolent. It is all about what structural and economic incentives exist. A for-profit corporation based on the business model of advertisement is structurally incompatible with some objectives that I - as a netizen - want to achieve (freedom, privacy).
This is also why I don’t agree with those of “it’s a win for decentralized” or “it will bring users”. For me decentralization and other properties (e.g. OpenSource code) are only some necessary conditions to achieve the above abstract and ideological goals.
Pitting two piles of shit against each other does not make the winner any better.
Not better, but if one of them goes down it’s still a win in my book.
I don’t know. If we’re comparing shit, some shit is better than other shit. We don’t see farmers fertilizing their fields with duck shit. Nah. They use the good shit - bull shit.
I hope they destroy each other