[pavlov]

As the past two years of Twitter's evolution have shown, more power to Elon Musk actually leads to more censorship.

He's running the social media service like a kingdom where lèse-majesté is the gravest offense, promoting himself and blocking any topics that he doesn't personally like (including the existence of his own daughter who posts on Threads now).

Old Twitter had flawed content moderation processes, but at least there was a process.

[throw0101d]

> lèse-majesté

TIL:

> Lèse-majesté or lese-majesty (UK: /ˌliːz ˈmædʒɪsti/ leez MAJ-ist-ee, US: /ˌleɪz -/ layz - )[1][2][3] is an offence or defamation against the dignity of a ruling head of state (traditionally a monarch but now more often a president) or of the state itself. The English name for this crime is a modernised borrowing from the medieval French, where the phrase meant 'a crime against the Crown'. In classical Latin, laesa māiestās meant 'hurt/violated majesty' or 'injured sovereignty' (originally with reference to the majesty of the sovereign people, in post-classical Latin also of the monarch).[2][3]

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lèse-majesté

[Levitz]

In what way does taking X off Brazil decrease the censorship in Brazil?

[cassianoleal]

It certainly makes whatever censorship might be taking place less skewed by Musk's personal whims.

[Gud]

No, because that speech could (presumably, can never be sure what’s allowed in a quasi-democracy) take place on another website.

[cassianoleal]

Yes but it wouldn't be subjected to Musk's censorship on Random Website, whereas on Twitter it is.

[Gud]

Yes, but if the government censors it, it’s forbidden on both. Surely you muse see the difference?

[cassianoleal]

Yes, I do. That's precisely my point. It's based on law. Brazil is a democratic country. The law is the will of the people, or at least it is as much as bullshit USA-based representative democracy goes. Still much closer to the will of the people than Musk's personal opinions and whims.

[malermeister]

It removes the censor that is Musk.

[rapsey]

I mean he paid 40 billion. He can run it any way he pleases.

[okasaki]

I thought he borrowed it? In which case he definitely can't run it any way he pleases.

[nradov]

Debtors generally have no direct authority over management decisions unless the borrower defaults. So legally speaking, someone with majority voting control over a company can pretty much run it any way he pleases. (I am clarifying corporate governance rules here, not taking a position on recent management decisions.)