Oh, oops. I legit thought that was from their real news and not their satirical news.While I could believe the FBI would do that. The article you posted is from the Babylon Bee.
Oh, oops. I legit thought that was from their real news and not their satirical news.While I could believe the FBI would do that. The article you posted is from the Babylon Bee.
Sometimes reality and satire are indistinguishable.Oh, oops. I legit thought that was from their real news and not their satirical news.
Twitter is moving against LibsofTikTok again. This time there's no tweet or reason given, just "Hateful Conduct."
Musk might have thin skin... but he kinda has a point here?Elon Musk's declarations that he believes in absolute free speech contrast rather vividly with his thin skin over any criticism that directly targets himself or his pet projects. He recently posted on social media, doubling down on previous attacks on a Tesla FSD user for daring to (very mildly) criticize the software by declaring that it is "unfair" to publicly criticize the FSD features in any way whatsoever because they're a voluntary beta test. While he welcomes negative feedback, Musk says, that feedback should only be made via private channels.
While the person certainly has the right to do that, depending on the specifics of how it was done could range from merely tasteless to outright immoral to potentially illegal*.
--------------
* It could end up libelous or be in violation of the contract regarding the beta
You have to be joking. All the guy said was that Tesla still has "much work to do" on refining FSD, which is not just mild but milquetoast as a criticism. There is absolutely no-fucking-way that could be remotely construed as libelous *or* tasteless, and Musk being so angry and offended over this demonstrates a truly astounding level of thin skin.
So what specifically did Musk say?
Edit: IMO, if someone asked for early beta access and then posted a huge diatribe over how it's not ready and should be banned, then Elon's counter-argument would be pretty reasonable. But that's not what the critic said at all, and in context of what he actually said, Elon very much comes off as a thin skinned man-child throwing a temper tantrum because someone failed to kiss his ass over his favorite toy.
"I may greatly dislike what you are saying, but I'm willing to take a bullet so that you can say what you wish to say."
I think this is an incredibly dangerous precedent to set, infringing dangerously on private property rights and setting the stage to bring back the horrible FCC "fairness doctrine” with an even broader scope than before.
It just comes back to the platform/publisher divide.
If everything posted on Facebook is being said 'by facebook,' they absolutely have the right to censor what other people post on their website.
But then they're also legally liable for everything posted on their website.
If they don't want to be legally liable, then they're a platform, not a publisher, and they don't get to censor.