As long as I have been on the internet the ideals of the internet have been declining.
Which as I seen it were people working together to solve a common goal. Accessibility. Exchange of information. Discussion based where ideas are exchanged, dissected and people learn and grow.
Now this isn’t about twitter exactly because I have never been one for twitter. I’m much more interested in seeing ideas and views being valued for what they are, not for valuing the person and following their views. But the absolute disgust the common man has over a space where anyone can say what they want scares me. People only want to hear what they want to hear, they want to be controlled and those they disagree with silenced.
That’s why this marks the end of the glory days because one else is going to run a big site of free speech ever again. This was what I believe to be the last attempt. Maybe the fediverse will do something being less centralised but who knows?
He made a big show about free speech and he got slated for it.
No one is going to try that again.
I’m not sure what you aren’t getting. Did Musk talk a lot about free speech? Yes. Did he do things that were pro free speech? Yes. Did he get slated by a lot of people for both those two points? Yes. So why would anyone or any business try the free speech again?
All that above is an argument in isolation. I don’t see why that wouldn’t hold as a solid justification that free speech wouldn’t be tried again. What is confusing in that?
Has Musk done non free speech things? Yes. Was there a big outcry about it and people saying that is around and free speech is a goal? No, not really. People use it as a lolz got you thing. But as a fundamental argument of people copying that, people are for it. His lack of free speech has been seen as a good thing.
No. Again, he banned people for saying things he didn’t like. Not illegal things. Things he didn’t want them to say, including journalists who reported on the bannings. How is that free speech? Why is this not getting through to you?
As long as I have been on the internet the ideals of the internet have been declining.
Which as I seen it were people working together to solve a common goal. Accessibility. Exchange of information. Discussion based where ideas are exchanged, dissected and people learn and grow.
Now this isn’t about twitter exactly because I have never been one for twitter. I’m much more interested in seeing ideas and views being valued for what they are, not for valuing the person and following their views. But the absolute disgust the common man has over a space where anyone can say what they want scares me. People only want to hear what they want to hear, they want to be controlled and those they disagree with silenced.
That’s why this marks the end of the glory days because one else is going to run a big site of free speech ever again. This was what I believe to be the last attempt. Maybe the fediverse will do something being less centralised but who knows?
Again- how is this an attempt at free speech if he bans people who say things he doesn’t like?
Like I said. Looks like no one is going to try the free speech thing again.
Still not sure why you’re counting someone who bans people as “trying the free speech thing.”
He made a big show about free speech and he got slated for it.
No one is going to try that again.
I’m not sure what you aren’t getting. Did Musk talk a lot about free speech? Yes. Did he do things that were pro free speech? Yes. Did he get slated by a lot of people for both those two points? Yes. So why would anyone or any business try the free speech again?
All that above is an argument in isolation. I don’t see why that wouldn’t hold as a solid justification that free speech wouldn’t be tried again. What is confusing in that?
Has Musk done non free speech things? Yes. Was there a big outcry about it and people saying that is around and free speech is a goal? No, not really. People use it as a lolz got you thing. But as a fundamental argument of people copying that, people are for it. His lack of free speech has been seen as a good thing.
No. Again, he banned people for saying things he didn’t like. Not illegal things. Things he didn’t want them to say, including journalists who reported on the bannings. How is that free speech? Why is this not getting through to you?