Elon Cleaning House

I’m a regular user and I’ll leave and take both of my followers with the first alternative that comes up. I don’t mind dick CEOs who sell my data (Zucker) but I don’t like feeling like I’m in a club run by a moron like Elon.

 

I’ll miss it since I’ve got him on mute and my feed is much more tolerable. In fact I’ve muted a ton of right wing nonsense in the last week.

 

Everyone is missing it, it hasn't started yet. But the comments on his post saying they were going to get started in 40 minutes, from over an hour ago, are entertaining.

 

I’m sure it will be somewhere between the Kracken and Al Capone’s vault.

 

The preamble by noted tool Talibi is going on forever.

looks to be very boring

 

Initiall reviews are in and the ratings are very low!

 

Faux News is unimpressed!

‘Not Really the Smoking Gun We’d Hoped For’: Miranda Devine Pours Cold Water on Musk’s Big Twitter Reveal, Spins Theory He Was ‘Leaned On’

 

Waiting for the downplay….

 

Pissing in jars; people of influence seem to be going mental at a rapider rate than I remember in my youth.

 

In summary, both campaigns had access to Twitter to request to remove stuff and did, but apparently there was a “Deep Twitter” because they had Lib employees and that just has to be nefarious, despite it being unverified and potentially stollen information, and the takedown request were nudes against Twitter’s TOS, with nothing being illegal or a 1A violation.

What a snooze fest!

Next they will be telling us how Fox News helps Republicans

 

Libs are super butt hurt they've lost one of their biggest tools for censoring/pushing certain ideas and steering govt narratives...second stage of grief.

 

This post is particularly funny because it's directly below a post that quotes Tucker Carlson/NY Post as being unimpressed...

I'm guessing you can't see that because you have poster on ignore ...

It's actually funny to read that, because Tucker and NY Post Opinion Columnist who covers Hunter are saying the same thing we've been saying ... Musk had to bow down and grovel to his new masters at Apple, and is lying about how badly the meeting went for him ... LOL. See, it's not just us "Musk haters" who think this. Get on board.

 

The Howard Hughes vibes are definitely growing.

 

Here's the thing with Hunter, and maybe this is the wrong thread. If he committed a crime, throw him in jail. I promise the only people that will care have the last name Biden. You won't see a bunch of threads on here crying about it.

 

Tucker Carlson is an idiot.

 

I think I said at the time that Twitters blackout on Hunters laptop felt questionable at best. But there’s a lot of ‘so what?’ too.
It didn’t exactly shut down all news stories or conversation, did it?

 

Next on the agenda ? A cleanup at Facebook ?

 

Elon Musk’s promised Twitter exposé on the Hunter Biden story is a flop that doxxed multiple people

The emails don’t show how the initial decision was reached — just that there were emails afterward in which leaders at Twitter discussed whether it was the correct choice. Taibbi reports that Jack Dorsey, who was then Twitter’s CEO, was not aware of the decision.

Musk seems to read the events as proof of government meddling. “If this isn’t a violation of the Constitution’s First Amendment, what is?” he wrote in response to one leaked email. But the email appears to show the Biden campaign, which is not a government entity, flagging tweets to Twitter for “review” under their moderation policies before the election took place. Taibbi says, “there’s no evidence — that I’ve seen — of any government involvement in the laptop story.”

Meanwhile, Taibbi’s handling of the emails — which seem to have been handed to him at Musk’s direction, though he only refers to “sources at Twitter” — appears to have exposed personal email addresses for two high-profile leaders: Dorsey and Representative Ro Khanna. An email address that belongs to someone Taibbi identifies as Dorsey is included in one message, in which Dorsey forwards an article Taibbi wrote criticizing Twitter’s handling of the Post story. Meanwhile, Khanna confirmed to The Verge that his personal Gmail address is included in another email, in which Khanna reaches out to criticize Twitter’s decision to restrict the Post’s story as well.

“As the congressman who represents Silicon Valley, I felt Twitter’s actions were a violation of First Amendment principles so I raised those concerns,” Khanna said in a statement to The Verge. “Our democracy can only thrive if we are open to a marketplace of ideas and engaging with people with whom we disagree.”

 

Christ he's an idiot.

 

The funny part is that this has the hallmarks of the DNC hack in 2016 in terms of how it is presented/spun. It isn't so much about making a case. What it is about is to frame normal activity (people within a social media company debating a decision on moderation- which happens at any social media website, including this one) into something nefarious. And rather than trying to make that case explicitly (that it is nefarious), the goal is just to get it out there and let people utilize it for their own purposes based upon their own goals and resentments. You never have to make the connection between the evidence and something nefarious actually happening (i.e., somebody at Twitter saying that they should ban Republicans because Democrats would be better for them or the country or something like that). You just have to create the vibe that you did, and allow people's desire for it to be true to take over, such that they won't dig into the actual data with any specificity.

I remember after the DNC issue, I tried to get people to talk specifically about what was nefarious and utilize specific emails to actually build a case one way or the other. Nobody wanted to do that, because simply claiming it was a disaster vaguely was more useful to serving their political goals and feeding their senses of resentment.

Same basic thing here. If you actually look at the emails provided, there isn't a single one that shows anything nefarious. You have employees arguing over whether they should apply a fairly reasonable policy against hacked material, how to present that to the public, and both political parties reporting activity that violated Twitter's policies (with an unsupported claim that Democrats had more access and the only examples provided being of Democrats doing it (correctly, it should be noted, as they were asking for naked pictures nonconsensually posted to be pulled down), but Taibbi claiming that both sides did).