Cont: Musk buys Twitter II

well you can hope in one hand and **** in the other and see which one fills up faster.

and there's already a pretty big pile of **** in this story.
 
Samson said:
It seems only Media Matters could concoct a villain out of Riley Gaines
What a disgusting rabid organisation. HopefullyMusk puts them in orbit and leaves them to rot.

https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/right-wing-influencers-fuel-harassment-against-lgbtq-youth
Click to expand...

You're already on record as saying you think it is a fine thing that Trump and Musk are liars because, while you misunderstand game theory and evolution, you say it trains people to spot liars.

Remember...

Samson said:
Game theory requires actual liars in a community to train the community into awareness. Trump and to a lesser extent Musk qualify. I do not believe that Jews are trying to kill white men.
Click to expand...

Now that you think Media Matters are lying, that is somehow bad now?

I don't see much ethical consistency here. All I see is a kind of blind tribalism. You are with Musk and (presumably) Trump whether they are liars or not because of some made-up rationalizations about how it's good to have lairs around. BUT you are against Media Matters for the same because... they are reporting things about Musk and (presumably) Trump that paint them to be dishonest (and worse).

And to bolster your claims, you do very little to actually support them with argument, and instead think that it is sufficient to point out that there are lots of other members of your tribe whose podcasts you marinade your brain in on a daily basis. You also point out that you will ignore anything that contradicts these things because they stop your pattern-seeking attempt to make sense of the world.

Now, I may not be some Jordan Peterson-level psychologist, but that sounds to me like literal brainwashing and cult-level adulation.
 
mumblethrax said:
You and Musk share similar ideas about what it means to be a free speech advocate--free speech for me, utter annihilation (irrespective of the merits of the case) for wrongthink (in a totally unrelated matter) for thee.
Click to expand...

Spot on.
 
Too much of my enemy's enemy is my friend around here.
A clear breach of critical thinking lore.
 
By the way, Dave Rubin apparently thinks the World Health Organization is a terrorist organization, according to a dumb tweet on Musk's Twitter.

This is also a guy who thinks everyone should be more like Viktor Orban's Hungary, even though in Hungary, same-sex marriage and same-sex adoption of children is completely illegal. In other words, he's fine for the rights that he and his husband enjoy to be denied Hungarians. True piece of ****, that Rubin. And he's too busy being venal and/or stupid and gullible accepting the blandishments of Orban and co.'s charm offensive to right-leaning propaganda channels such as his, to understand that if his tribe in the US got their way, then the country would go the way of Orbanist Hungary. Does he really think that transgenderism is the only place they will draw the line?
 
Samson said:
Too much of my enemy's enemy is my friend around here.
A clear breach of critical thinking lore.
Click to expand...

That right there is making a category error. There are critical thinking skills and techniques, but "lore" is something you get from (usually unexamined) traditions.
 
HansMustermann said:
I'm also not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, yada, yada, but yeah, it seems pretty accurate. And I was already wondering about it essentially admitting that yeah, just as reported, if you scroll long enough and follow certain twits (bad pun intended), you will get those ads there.

About it being filed in Texas... I'm taking a wild GUESS that he WANTS it dismissed. It fits that pattern I've been mentioning of making grand claims and not following through.

BUT I still don't get it why specifically Texas. You'd think if he's doing it for publicity, he'd choose a state without an anti-SLAPP statute. A SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) is a frivolous lawsuit, typically exactly a defamation lawsuit, designed to just discourage someone from saying legitimate criticism, or else. Typically "else" meaning you'll bury them in legal fees even if they win.

But Texas does have an anti-SLAPP statute, in the form of the Texas Citizens Participation Act.

So... what exactly is Elon thinking, your guess is as good as mine.
Click to expand...
The Federal Circuit (Fifth IIRR) encompassing Texas has stated that anti-SLAPP laws can't be used in Federal court there. The Ninth, including California, has said the anti-SLAP[P laws can be used in Federal courts.
Hence venue shopping.
 
mumblethrax said:
...which can't be used in federal courts, where this lawsuit was filed.

Notable that his usual consigliore hasn't attached his name to this case. Probably because he has a modicum of self respect or something.
Click to expand...
Or doesn't want to be censured.
 
angrysoba said:
That right there is making a category error. There are critical thinking skills and techniques, but "lore" is something you get from (usually unexamined) traditions.
Click to expand...

Considering Samson believes Nazis are his friends because they are against treatment for trans identifying kids i.e. the people Musk has unbanned that Samson hails (or should that be heils) Musk for unbanning I'm having to buy a new batch of irony meters.
 
This extreme right crap seems to be slowly pushed back into "safe spaces" again and mostly by its own practioners.
If musk wants to be the safe haven for racists and ct nuts that's perfect. But no national law can force anyone to buy advertising on the platform.

If musk actually forces some cash out of MM everyone else will be thinking about thier own use of the platform, and get out while it's still cheap.
 
I don't think he's trying to force MM to buy ads. I didn't see that in the legal document. He's just trying to SLAPP them out of talking about the problems with Twitter's ad placement.

I don't really see how that translates to any direct danger from Musk to anyone else using the platform or buying ads for it, at least as long as they don't talk about it. And even the last one is only really a problem for the smaller outfits. If he tries to SLAPP IBM or Apple or Microsoft or Oracle and the like, he may have a surprise. They're not someone who'll back out, out of fear of running out of legal funds. In fact, Musk may well be fighting such a legal battle in the shade, because IBM can block out the sun with their lawyers :p

The only real trouble might be not hearing that your ad showed up next to some nazi BS, but even then you might sooner or later figure out that at the very least they're not as targeted as you think. Big corporations tend to have big departments for figuring out what works and what doesn't in advertising.
 
When you spell out the damage MM is supposed to have done, it's that it made people, in particular advertisers, aware of racist content along adverts.

It should be easy to point out that the damage was placement of the ads alongside negative content.

It's like saying murder is okay as long as no none can find the body.
 
Well, TECHNICALLY he calls it for "defamation" (which, again, is pretty much the bog standard SLAPP recipe), or so I'd normally say. But as was pointed out before by Wudang and others, the legal filing pretty much admits that yep, it's true, if you scroll far enough and/or follow certain twits (still intentional pun) you will see his algorithm do that placement. Really, it's like he WANTS to get it dismissed early, and go back to claiming he's the genius stifled by the conspiracy.
 
although it's been pretty obvious that musk doesn't really care, or maybe understand, what free speech is all about, it's pretty illustrative of what actual censorship would look like. that is to say, banning someone from a particular platform is too far, but suing to silence someone from talking about a topic at all anywhere unless they are rich enough to defend themselves is acceptable.

-edit-

and that's not even touching on pleading with ideologically friendly prosecutors to open investigations.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom