jack dorsey on his exit from bluesky, how twitter lost its way, jack’s strategy for ending
  • wagoner@infosec.pub
    39·
    6 months ago

    The interviewer lost me at “while Elon does appear committed to openness and freedom of speech”. Especially when they proceed later to talk about Elon taking down posts when asked by the Indian and Australian governments, locally to those territories and the world.

  • darkphotonstudio@beehaw.org
    27·
    6 months ago

    I’m not going to bother reading the empty headed thoughts of yet another techbro billionaire. I’d rather do just about anything else, like watch paint dry or grass grow, a far more productive use of my time.

  • modulus@lemmy.ml
    22·
    6 months ago

    For me the weirdest part of the interview is where he says he doesn’t want to follow anyone, that he wants the algorithm to just pick up on his interests. It’s so diametrically opposed to how I want to intentionally use social networks and how the fedi tends to work that it’s sometimes hard to remember there are people who take that view.

    • Juno@beehaw.org
      12·
      6 months ago

      Omg, I have friends like this who are like “I don’t want to make decisions, I just want the algorithm to decide for me”

      I look at them like I just bumped into an alien in those moments. Have a brief “Maybe I shouldn’t be friends with you” but then reel myself in and think "they can’t be serious "

    • Old_Geezer@lemmy.ca
      4·
      6 months ago

      it’s sometimes hard to remember there are people who take that view.

      Many people have this view. Us on the Fedi are unique in that we don’t, or didn’t before the mass Twitter émigré occurred.

    • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
      3·
      6 months ago

      Yes, he is. People like this are divorced from reality.

      He’s a billionaire or whatever. The speech doesn’t effect him in any way. He still has more resources than he could hope to burn through in multiple lifetimes. Speech literally cannot harm him.

      He doesn’t understand that to all the doors, some speech can and does hurt us.

    • Old_Geezer@lemmy.ca
      1·
      6 months ago

      this guy is 100% committed to give nazis a platform, right?

      I think you mean — speech you don’t like. Where do you draw the line?

        • Old_Geezer@lemmy.ca
          1·
          6 months ago

          Well, literal Nazis would be a good start.

          The problem is that most of the blocking is simply because people don’t like the speech. This is a huge concern for any liberal democracy. Free speech is a right, and that means speech that one doesn’t necessarily like!

          • Scary le Poo@beehaw.org
            6·
            6 months ago

            No free speech is not a right. Freedom of speech without prosecution from the government is a right.

            No one is required to platform your stupid fucking viewpoint.

            The 1st amendment ONLY allows you to say what you like and not have the government prosecute you for it. However, there are still limits to speech that cannot be prosecuted.

            For example, you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater. You can’t cause a mass panic that results in injuries or death.

            A private company has exactly zero obligation to platform your idiotic ramblings.