this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2024
356 points (93.6% liked)

Technology

59589 readers
3024 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Pot: Kettle

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hannesh93@feddit.org 127 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Brazil first, Australia 2nd and hopefully EU third nail in the coffin for that clown's platform

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Oh, X is banned in Brazil and Australia? Or what happened in those countries?

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 68 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Banned in Brazil, forced to pay 10% of global earnings per day until stopping misinformation posting in Australia.

[–] Krackalot@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

10% of global earnings? Isn't it losing money? Makes it sound like they're paying him.

[–] neshura@bookwormstory.social 29 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Earnings is incoming money before any expenditures

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Blooper@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 2 months ago
[–] jonne@infosec.pub 19 points 2 months ago

Earnings is different from profits.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

Thanks! Good to hear.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 16 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

X is forbidden from offering services in Brazil until and unless it complies with the local courts (the company refused an order to suspend some accounts, then wouldn't appoint a local representative as Brazilian law requires). Local ISPs are required to block it. I don't know about Australia.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] criitz@reddthat.com 5 points 2 months ago

It's all mentioned in the linked article

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 83 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Of course, of course. The people fighting against fascism are always the real fascists. According to the fascists, anyway.

[–] JustZ@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

E.g., Russia saying it's denazifying Ukraine.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 13 points 2 months ago

They're not even fighting against fascism per se they're just asking him to obey the law. Asking people to obey the law isn't exactly a political position.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

The people fighting fascists do look a lot like, and behave like fascists. Why don't we just stamp out twitter ? They are unredeemable and detrimental to existing. Just shut it down. And all forms of social media along with it.

None of it has any worth, burn it all diwb.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Reminds of all the conservative whackos calling the BLM protesters "fascists".

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 53 points 2 months ago

I'm not sure that word means what you think it means, Elon. Regulating scam sites is a pretty typical government thing.

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 40 points 2 months ago

Good thing he gutted Twitter's content moderation teams in the name of "free speech", eh?

If I had a dollar for every time a billionaire loses more money than I could ever dream of because their hubris got in the way or they misunderstood a concept or were just plain dumb -- well, I guess I'd be a billionaire too.

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 27 points 2 months ago (1 children)

stop proposing and just do it. if they don't pay; then ban twitter from operating in your country. enough tip-toeing.

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

So, we're not doing Section 230 anymore ?

So, are we giving the right to twitter, no, the mandate, to delete everyone we and they don't like ?

I mean, this is what's going to happen and is already happening. Just the most powerful people on earth become the arbiters of Truth ?

Like, isn't anyone else seeing this is bad ?

I mean, the worst outcome possible that we've seen coming for 40 years kind of bad ?

I think just kill all social media, would be a much preferable solution. Maybe cut every optic fiber instead !

Just don't give these monsters that power, I think global thermonuclear war is a cakewalk compared to this prison we're building around us.

[–] aesthelete@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

So, we’re not doing Section 230 anymore ?

That's a part of a US law, and as such doesn't throw a shrimp on the bar-b in Australia, mate.

[–] SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

How dare you speak for other nations like that.
Sounds like they're lacking some essential American Freedom™!
Come to think of it, sounds like you're acting very Red™ yourself.

(/s, if you missed it)

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

"They go low, we go high! Let's give the people who want to one day undo freedom of speech the freedom to spread misinformation, so they can undo freedom of speech one day."

One thing I had to learn through the years of my life, if you turn the other cheek, you might make someone flinch the first or second time, but after a while, they'll be expecting you turning the other cheek for the second punch, and call you "uncivil" and "unfair" the very moment you don't turn the other cheek. Just replace the "turning the other cheek" with the whole "they go low, we go high" mantra.

[–] TheDonkerZ@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 months ago

History is wrriten by the victor, and unfortunately, if you have money in this world, you're winning.

[–] AshMan85@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Someone needs to put that asshole in his place. Eat the rich.

[–] ulkesh@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

There are only two ways to do this:

  1. Him becoming destitute and poor

  2. Him being dead

Neither is likely to happen anytime soon, so we’re stuck with this piece of shit for some decades longer. If the human race could collectively just ignore him, stop buying his cars and stop thinking he’s some kind of genius, then perhaps there’s a third option. But that relies on the human race having the capacity to critically think, which is even more unlikely than option #1.

[–] Fridgeratr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 2 months ago

[projection intensifies]

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

hit dog will holler

[–] LordWiggle@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago (1 children)

How many positions on free speech does the kama sutra actually have? Just wondering.

[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] T00l_shed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

The worst part? That's exactly how Leon skum would reply to that statement. And then his minions would cackle and circle jerk about it.

[–] TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

"The true fascist are the people who try to place control on disinformation being used to prop fascists!" - Musk, probably

[–] Rob200@lemmy.autism.place 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Elon Musk used the word fascist? In Elon's response to this Australia bill noted above.

[–] cmhe@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

What a strange selection of censored words... "fail ~~to~~ comply", "~~The~~ billionaire owner...", "would strenghten ~~the~~ Australian", "has yet to ~~be~~ passed"

[–] Rob200@lemmy.autism.place 1 points 2 months ago

If somethings too long, narrow it down to the essentials.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I guess his PoV is that Xitter is his property, thus when he does whatever there, it's not censorship, but when state demands from him to do whatever there, it is.

But his position would be easier to defend were he not Elon Musk.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 8 points 2 months ago

Being under someone's boot isn't so fun, is it dumbass? Almost as if we should be working towards a society as if you don't know who you'll be in it.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 5 points 2 months ago

You know, the ban here was enlightening for me, about certain people from my social circles. Four examples:

  1. Resumed Twitter shitposting in Bluesky. Different URL. No mention of Twitter.
  2. Cheering Twitter being gone, as they were only using it due to their contacts, but felt like shit for doing it. Criticising how Moraes did it, but not the goal itself.
  3. LARPs as against fascism but screeches nonstop in Bluesky about Twitter being gone, as they think that the world revolves around their own convenience.
  4. Left microblogging altogether.

But I digress (as this has barely anything to do with the OP). Those people like Musk are bound to "creatively reinterpret" the words: in one situation orange is yellow, in another it's red, both, neither. Sometimes it isn't "ackshyually" related to red or yellow, it's "inverted blue". And suckers fall for it. That's what Musk is doing with fascism.

[–] Lycist@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Unrelated to the article:

I read this title as "Fascifacts" instead of "Facists"...

I think that instead of calling it fake news, we should start calling it "Fascifacts."

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›