[orwin]

This storyline was a rare case of me supporting Elon, but once again, he goes too far, childishly, for his ego. He is just proving a lot of people i don't particularly like right, that billionaires are supranational powers. Which does support a very marxist view on capitalism (and productivism sadly), that it enable money to create power above political power.

[davidguetta]

Im confused of your point.

Power is power.. of course a bilionaire or even milionaire is gonna be "more powerful" than some nations.. there are some with < 50M gdp.

But at the end of the day its just about internet. X has every right to say fuck off to some countries its not based in, while countries has the "right" if they decide it to censor some parts of the internet.

Thats not really the point in the end. The point is really "is free speech, including hate speech and disinformation should be right or not in your country"

Its a very hard question that im not sure i have the answer. Someones's hate speech is always someone else's "speaking the truth" but ibknow some cases where censoring made sense.

[mulmen]

Assuming capitalism exists without regulation is grade school philosophy.

[malermeister]

Marx was right and people like Musk and Thiel are living proof.

[mrmlz]

Haha - oh no, he is going to far with allowing free speech. The sender and the tone is more important to you I guess?

[orwin]

What sender and tone? The issue is that an individual show power superior to that of a state. And a powerful and rich one at that.

I would care if he did the same to Turkey or India where similar demand were made (it wasn't legislative power there, but still). I really appreciate the fact that he called Brazil out, i would have really appreciated if he called India or Turkey out, i think this is going too far.

And as for "going to far with allowing free speech", why doesn't he do the same in China, where free speech issues seems to be far greater, and the great Firewall is blocking way more than just X?

No, he was just sightly hypocritical but seemed mostly principled before this choice, now he just seems too powerful, hypocritical and egotistic. You know what my theory is? Brazil just died as a Tesla importer because of BYD, so he chose to make a stand on it, while India and Turkey used to be potential countries he could invest in at the time so he shut up and let them walk over him.

It seems its just about money, so he grandstand on his principles when almost no money is being made, and shut up when he doesn't want to upset people with dollars he could get.

[mrmlz]

I guess you would be on the barricades fighting for DDRs right to suppress free speech as well.

I take whatever victories I can. I don't care about his motives, I'm sure they are nefarious or money related. But that doesn't matter. I don't care about his motivation I care about the results.

[orwin]

The result will be that speech will be suppressed for 99% of the population and only a select few can talk. If it was a principled position the effects would be 10 times greater but since he compromised himself for money, the effects would be minimal.

I've thought about it more. I think the reason why he refused was because it was a public court order, so everyone could see him cooperate. If they did it like Erdoğan or Modi, i.e with private communication, Twitter would have done it.

If this is the reason, it's in fact Anti-free speech, as transparency is a pillar of that right, no?

[edit] Also, free personal attacks twice now, really nice of you.

[mrmlz]

? Why would it be suppressed for 99%?

Yeah its harder to censor people out in the open. FB and Zuck hid it - but i believe he recently said he regretted doing that.

I dont see how hiding your motivation and allowing free speech is in fact anti-free-speech.

Why do you see it as an attack? You are arguing that brazil has the right to limit free speech and that Elon should comply and censor his platform. That is what they've done in many countries, DDR for example. Do you not agree?

[orwin]

It's suppressed for everyone who don't have Starlink or the mean/knowledge to pay for a VPN on their phone.

Only fighting against account deletion when the demand is above-board like in Brazil, and secretly comply when it's hide and you only see side-effect like in Turkey is indeed anti-transparency, as you are announcing to the world: 'Text me and I'll do it, but not in the open'.

Yeah, obviously it isn't a personal attack, I must have been wrong, it was a perfectly good faith argument, so I will respond:

I'm saying that Elon Musk see himself above Brazil court of justice, and act like a supranational power. If an individual thought himself above the law, or will of the people in DDR, I would have been on the wall. My father still has a part of it btw.

I will add that i apologize for the sarcasm but I will let it there, because that's what I would have responded in real life. If you _really_ didn't intend it as a personal attack, you should consider how you communicate with your peers. The first message wasn't any better and close enough to an ad hominem I considered not engaging, but I thought I wasn't clear enough and i needed clarification, so it was a good vehicle. Sorry again if it wasn't a personal attack.

[malermeister]

Was it free speech when he banned a bunch of leftists for disagreeing with his views?

[mrmlz]

No (I have no idea who he has banned or not) but that sounds like a powertrip!

[fmajid]

Not just leftists, but also journalists critical of him: https://www.independent.co.uk/tech/x-journalist-ban-elon-mus...

His so-called free-speech absolutism is a sham and he does not deserve the benefit of doubt on this.

[mrmlz]

I dont believe he is altruistic - his actions in this instance is however positive and i enjoy seeing that.

[mike_hearn]

He didn't ban any of those people:

> All the accounts were restored in a few hours

[Timon3]

What state were they restored to? If they were accessible, why did they have to be restored?

If you're going to argue "a ban doesn't count if it's reversed after a couple of hours", what's the threshold? Could Elon ban people for a week without it counting as a ban? What if it happens repeatedly?

[mrmlz]

And I disagree with him only allowing right wing radicals and banning left wing radicals.