Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

"Free Speech" Platforms

When Elon Musk bought 'Twitter', one of the reasons he apparently gave for the purchase was his belief that the platform didn't truly allow free expression. I have no idea if he was correct in his assessment of the service, never having actually used it, but as I understand it from other sources he was just talking out of his proverbial backside.
It was "left-wing" some say, and would impose "strict censorship" of mainstream political views, but something tells me that wasn't the case or, if it was, the incidence of it was exaggerated. I've come across a few "free speech platforms", and my interpretation of this expression is that those sites:
1. Have little, or no (usually no) moderation.
2. Are overrun by trolls, scammers, catfish and other rabble because of the lack of moderation.
3. Allow extremists, literal Nazis who claim that Hitler was a good guy, to spread their odious lies.
Free speech never has, nor will ever be, completely free. There will always be restrictions upon it, simply because [i]there have to be[/i]. Speech, like everything else in life, has consequences. If you, for example, deliberately set out to destroy someone's reputation out of spite, you shouldn't be at all surprised and complain about it if that person hits back. Nor can you make false 000 (emergency) calls, or scream that there's a bomb in a crowded and confined space, like on an aeroplane.
Now, whenever I come across a site that promotes itself this way, as "allowing free speech", I avoid it altogether, because I do not want to be abused for simply disagreeing with someone about something. That's something I don't need in my life, the kind of toxic nonsense that just makes things worse. I don't believe in that kind of "free speech".
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
pjgirl · 22-25, F
Messing with the Ukrainians might have been a mistake
plungesponge · 41-45, M
@pjgirl The satellite thing? To be fair, Musk offered free internet to Ukraine for humanitarian purposes, he was right not to let it be used for military reasons
pjgirl · 22-25, F
@plungesponge true, but I think he kind of made a war decision by disconnecting it to foil the Ukrainian attack. I can understand he was worried about an escalation, but the Ukrainians have said his decision cost lives. Elon’s father is right to be worried
Ynotisay · M
@plungesponge But was he right for entering in to a contract with the Department of Defense for Skylink kits earmarked for Ukraine? They bid on that contract.
plungesponge · 41-45, M
@Ynotisay I'm less familiar with the links to US defense, but my impression was that Starlink had shown it was too expensive to keep providing internet for free and the defence department made an offer to subsidize it. Personally I don't think it was wise to partner with the US military, given the stated purpose was humanitarian, but business-wise I'd understand that Starlink isn't going to do this for free permanently.
pjgirl · 22-25, F
@Ynotisay I think the issue is he took a hand in a situation. I imagine the Israelis would be annoyed if the White House remotely turned off a system and some of their personnel died
Ynotisay · M
@pjgirl He had a hand in the situation the second he got involved with the DoD. For him to make the decision he did as far a turning off the system, speaks to an out of control human being who should NEVER again be allowed to determine the fate of human beings on a whim.