Said one of the experts quoted — by Taylor Lorenz — in "'Opening the gates of hell': Musk says he will revive banned accounts/The Twitter chief says he will reinstate accounts suspended for threats, harassment and misinformation beginning next week" (WaPo).
Why would you want to keep people in Hell?
Why not forgive — if only to give them a second chance? Musk knows that the process of condemnation wasn't fair. At the very least, we are worried that it was skewed against conservatives. It's efficient to wipe the slate clean — to default toward freedom — and to begin again, with a viewpoint neutral approach that is transparent and centered on protecting individuals from harm, not on helping one side over another.
Some who are released from Hell will be those who shouldn't have been condemned in the first place. Some will be those from whom the group does need protection, but these will either go on and sin no more or they will sin again, and they can be dealt with under the new, fair procedure.
And Musk isn't even talking about letting everyone back in. The question he asked in his poll was "Should Twitter offer a general amnesty to suspended accounts, provided that they have not broken the law or engaged in egregious spam?" He can say the people have spoken and there will be "general amnesty," but there's that proviso. Anyone who is already known as a danger can still be excluded. On the face of it, Musk isn't recklessly absolutist about freedom of speech.
The hell the anti-Muskites are afraid of — isn't it just the loss of a political advantage they never should have had in the first place? Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?
पोस्ट्स
८२ टिप्पण्या:
Musk won't allow dead baby jokes, he said. Apparently he doesn't understand them, the essence of free speech which says it can't be counted on to go along with your pieties.
It historical competitor was grape jokes, which eventually displaced it.
Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?
Much as affirmative action can hurt the people it’s trying to help by placing them in situations where they’re in over their head, I think you have it right here that the “thumb on the scales” that liberals have enjoyed by controlling the cultural institutions has made them intellectually lazy, prone to adopting short-sighted or outright destructive ideas, and left them unable to mount a sound defense even of those ideas for which a sound defense is possible.
They started by wanting censorship, they ended by needing it.
"Two great sexes animate the world" - Milton, Paradise Lost
Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?
The left always loose on the battle field ideas. That's why they always default to RACIST! or HOMOPHOBE!
Or implement ranked choice voting, or 100% mail in voting, that takes 4 weeks to count the votes.
Censorship by another name.
Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?
Shouting down all conservative speakers on college Campuses. Because exploring ideas is dangerous....for the leftist, agenda.
This pretty much confirms that the dominant position of Democrats (and their various supporters like the MSM) today, is that not being able to fully control the views and forcibly exclude those who simply have views other than yours is like living in hell. That explains precisely why they seem to hate the United States and its Constitution so much.
And for the record, I've been a cruelly neutral independent my entire life and have voted Democrat many times in the past. But unless this extreme position changes it will be a very cold sunrise in hell before I can vote for another Democrat again. Free speech is THE core principle of any free country.
Good view.
If the folks who lament the return of the prodicgals had a capacity to debate, it likely became stunted after the opposition was banned.
One presumes even the lamest had something better than name-calling. Something, anyway.
Or lying.
The recently famous call for covid amnesty would require acknowledging that some of the stuff Authority was peddling was and is incorrect. And possibly had a cost, terrible or otherwise.
Without pushback, this sort of thing runs loose and only gets worse. Now, with the lack of pushback on various themes on Twitter ending....is there going to be a call for amnesty?
"Yeah, I lied. I didn't bother doing my homework. I called you, in absentia because you were banned, all kinds of nasty names and accused you of racism and so forth. Didn't have to bother justifying myself. Now you're back. Sorry. Okay? Okay/"
Probably an impossible task to complete, but it would be quite interesting to see the number of conservatives (people, ideas, claims) banned vs. the number of progressives (people, ideas, claims). What do you think the con:prog ratio is, 100:1, 1000:1?
they can be dealt with under the new, fair procedure...
There isn't one.
Y'all need to be watching more Jordan Peterson videos. Not the political stuff, but the psychology lectures.
Psychological "conservatives" like order, boundaries, keeping chaos outside the walls.
Psychological "liberals" are loosey goosey knock down the walls types.
But it turns out that the left is now composed of psychological conservatives. They insist on order, boundaries etc. They need their walls.
A Twitter that allows just anybody to post their thoughts, and allows millions of people to read these unregulated thoughts is not just one uncontrolled medium among many controlled ones. It's a great big hole in the wall, through which Hell can get in. It risks wrecking the whole City.
I’m old enough to remember people mocking those of us who knew Twitter was engaging in politically motivated censorship.
When do those people hang?
Hell is reading another Taylor Lorenz rant.
Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?
I believe you have cause and effect switched. They demand censorship because they cannot defend their ideas in honest debate.
mhardin
There was also the elephant joke: What is gray and goes "slam, slam, slam, slam"? A four-door elephant. Grapes could fit in there as well.
However, my father, Infantry, was too beat up after VE Day to go to the Pacific so they had him helping out in Europe for the next few months doing one thing or another. Place was a mess and since he spoke French and thought outside the box, they had stuff for him to do.
He encountered a trainload of dead babies. Should have been ransomed, but .... Anyway, he wasn't the only one. So the reference in the immediate post-war years wasn't meant to be funny in any funny way.
anti-Muskites
Less than a week ago I would have placed you firmly among their number, given the New York Times articles to which you chose to link, and your comments thereon. Has something changed? Do you now concede that Musk’s deep cuts into deadwood were necessary for the firm to survive and him to profit from his investment?
So the reference in the immediate post-war years wasn't meant to be funny in any funny way.
You can't out-piety a dead baby joke. It's made to defeat piety.
Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?
I agree with Gahrie. The left needs censorship because they cannot win real debates nor succeed in any true marketplace of ideas. This isn’t the way things were when you and I were young, Althouse, but I don’t live in Madison so there’s no soft cocoon to keep me from noticing that it’s a new world out there.
If you think I’m wrong then ask yourself which side yells “racist” at people who aren’t talking about racial issues, but whose ideas —and even facts! — they don’t like?
"Less than a week ago I would have placed you firmly among their number...."
Pay closer attention. If you think there are 2 camps, and everyone is in one or the other, you are certain to misread me.
What you've seen on other occasions is my scorn for Musk's fanboys.
’…isn't it just the loss of a political advantage they never should have had in the first place?’
Yes.
p.s. the left’s ideas can’t withstand free and open debate.
Hardin
That's now.
Taylor lorenz destroys peoples reputations gor a living
.
If you're looking for marker that an article is mostly narrative bullsh!t, watch for the phrase, "experts say".
I blame NPR which started this trend in the late 90s of digging up any old PhD at any far flung second rate college to buttress their narrative. We spoke with Robert Nobody, who runs the Center For Mediocre Academics at Northern Southwest Oklahoma University.
Egon Spengler:
There's something very important I forgot to tell you.
Peter Venkman:
What?
Spengler:
Don't reinstate the suspended accounts..
Venkman:
Why?
Spengler:
It would be bad.
Venkman:
I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, "bad"?
Spengler:
Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
Ray Stantz:
Total protonic reversal.
Venkman:
Right. That's bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.
isn't it just the loss of a political advantage they never should have had in the first place?
Yes, but we humans are more committed to our undeserved advantages than to our deserved ones. It’s the undeserved ones that make us feel special.
R C Belaire said...What do you think the con:prog ratio is, 100:1, 1000:1?
According to Musk himself, there were zero permanent bans on the left side of the Twitter aisle. I vaguely recall seeing lists of banned leftists, but he has access to better data than I do.
Taylor who?
Taylor who?
I’m enjoying Musk’s arguments using the left’s rhetoric on immigration.
It's because he's African-American, a Person of Color, a Peach American, right?
As the pendulum swings.
"...and stunt their capacity to debate"
That is not a capacity that has been apparent with these folks. They think they have won the debate by making accusations without evidence. With them, silence is violence, and speech is worse violence.
"to the alarm of activists and online trust and safety experts."
That is a line that won't inspire much trust in many of Taylor Lorenz's readers.
I get the sense that some on the Left thought that Twitter got big and they owned it. With Musk buying Twitter, some on the Right thought it was payback time.
It's going to take a while for Musk to get established and Twitter policies to settle out. I'll be interested to see where it stabilizes.
Heywood Rice said...
[quoting] they can be dealt with under the new, fair procedure...
There isn't one.
There *wasn't* one before, either.
Free speech is something to fear? Help me out, lefties. I'm not getting it.
Democracy survives in... some may say, the harsh light of tolerance.
Until a few months ago, I had for several years been editing letters for a group of newspapers in Florida. Obviously newspapers have to be selective about letters – they have limited space, and they aren't protected by a print version of section 230. But it is possible for moderation to be viewpoint neutral, allowing the widest possible latitude for opinion, while being quite restrictive as to the manner in which the viewpoint is expressed. One part of my letters in response to inquiries was, "Letter writers can freely criticize public figures (including a president), as long as what they say is not false as to some readily verifiable matter of fact." We did not accept letters disparaging people who are not public figures ( for instance, other letter-writers) by attacking their motives or character.
Of course, for such a policy to function requires that the moderators be committed to viewpoint neutrality, which was evidently not the case at Twitter.
I’m enjoying Musk’s arguments using the left’s rhetoric on immigration.
No person should immigrate where emigration reform is forthcoming to mitigate progress at both ends of the bridge and throughout. Demos-cracy is aborted at the border, in clinics, at the twilight fringe in the more progressive, liberal, em-pathetic Democrat solution.... let us bray.
Are the people complaining of Musk’s move to release the sinners, not the same people pushing the de-incarceration and zero cash bail programs? It’s OK to let loose stone-cold murderers but we must silence those whose opinions are not popular?
Anyone who is already known as a danger can still be excluded.
I don't think that's what he said, Ann.
What I saw him say was that he would continue to ban "illegal speech and egregious spam"
While those may be a danger, not all speech that some might consider a danger falls into those buckets.
The real test will be if he let's Alex Jones back in. Esp after he has said how offended he was by Jones sandy hook statements.
Not a fan of Jones but why is it NOT PERMITTED!! to question the official narrative? When questioning is not permitted, no matter how far-fetched, my first thought is "what don't they want us to know?"
John Henry
Hmmm...I wasn't aware that Musk had fanboys. I have seen many journalists expressing scorn and contempt for Musk and his tactics for maintaining and reshaping Twitter service heading towards a more open and less biased environment. Musk's observation about Twitter's staffing was hilarious ("10 people managing for every one person writing code"), and it explained a lot about Twitter's censorious environment.
The question is, is there any alternative to Twitter. Right now, there is not, Parler having been strangled in its cradle by Twitter's fanpersons and their Big Tech allies. Mastodon is choking on its own virtue. Never forget Emerson: "The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons."
Sam Harris has just made an ass of himself by huffily announcing that he is leaving Twitter--on Twitter. He could just shut off his phone or go silent. My prediction: he'll be back and pretend he never left.
Whenever I hear leftists talk about their need to censor free speech because it is hellish, I am reminded of the Harry Truman quote: “I never gave them hell. I just told them the truth and they thought it was hell.”
Ah so now the anti-counterdisinformation crowd is developing an wholistic antimuskite philosophy with the the unfortunate and ultimately doomed goal of ginning up support for antitransparent ad hoc censorship and banishment. Taylor is evil and she is insane. Don’t be like Taylor.
Althouse’s writing is close to being a proof of the Taranto Theorem.
Amadeus 48 @ 8:01: “… Musk's observation about Twitter's staffing was hilarious (‘10 people managing for every one person writing code”), and it explained a lot about Twitter's censorious environment…”
Seems right. Managers manage. First they manage worker bees, then (as productivity erodes under the weight of their management) they manage each other, then the managers managing the managers need to be managed, etc etc. A 10:1 ratio is impressive but only a first step toward the ball-of-snakes terminal state.
Hmmm...I wasn't aware that Musk had fanboys.
Whatever happened to simply admiring accomplishments? Is it now like the desire to make America great with America-first type policies? Is it overtly political to favor transparency and free speech?
"In all my years, I never seen, heard, nor smelled an issue that was so dangerous it couldn't be talked about." -- Stephen Hopkins, Rhode Island delegate to the Continental Congress (at least according to '1776.')
Obviously, some people's mileage varies.
While I sometimes thin’ it’s erroneous (and unfair) to make the argument that “the same people who say this are hypocritically saying this”…
I was struck by the idea of comparing this:
Some who are released from Hell will be those who shouldn't have been condemned in the first place. Some will be those from whom the group does need protection, but these will either go on and sin no more or they will sin again, and they can be dealt with under the new, fair procedure.
to the no bail, catch and release policies that some of the left are advocating. It seems to me that there are a considerable number of those advocates who want us to ignore the very real danger of known, violent criminals being turned back out onto the streets, but will cry foul at the idea of someone who said mean things on the internet being allowed to repeat that offense.
like opening the gates of Hell
Oh for Pete's sake...
They're not the gates of Hell, they're just your ass cheeks. Pull your head out from between them, stand up straight and take a deep breath. I promise you won't die.
Taylor Lorenz knows a lot about white privilege. Real white privilege. It's been her whole life.
Or...you can pretend you live in a world where a person the quality of a Taylor Lorenz is the standard for judging good and bad behavior. That despite her own track record of being a hideous human being, she's paid by one of the largest names in media to continue to spew out hit articles on people who go against The Narrative.
Again I ask: Why is the Left so continuously terrified of individual liberty?
The only danger that Twitter faces is the already mounting whispers to Apple and Google that they must drop Twitter from their app stores. To basically start the process of 'Parlering' Twitter. It would be interesting to see how Elon...and the rest of the world reacts to both Google and Apple in that event.
Also- to those idiots who continuously need to virtue signal and in this case publicly announce that they are leaving Twitter: No one cares. Not one person cares. Not even your mothers. Get on with your lives. And no- you don't need to announce your next move. Again: no one cares.
"we are worried that it was skewed against conservative"
Appreciate you making common cause with us deplorables, but there's that we again--in this case, not including anyone to your left.
"The hell the anti-Muskites are afraid of — isn't it just the loss of a political advantage they never should have had in the first place?"
Umm, yeah. Which in prog religion truly is hell.
"Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?"
Not really. Prog lackeys were always soft, but the prog PTB are not fearful, knowing they have the state apparatus on their side, and they were never into debate in the first place, so it's not a capacity that is stunted, or needed.
Progs don't mean to argue, they mean to rule. Which makes Musk dangerous, as the post shows. But $44B is a high price to pay for capturing prog territory, and now he's a target of their wrath, here and abroad. How many divisions does Musk have? He does have satellites, which the pope didn't, so there's that, for now.
Tim McGuire said "They started by wanting censorship, they ended by needing it". There is a lot to that. I never understood the intensity of the anti-Musk reaction but I think this may explain it.
Shouting down all conservative speakers on college Campuses. Because exploring ideas is dangerous....for the leftist, agenda.
Universities created "safe spaces", called spoken words "violence", thoughts and ideas "dangerous".
Most laughed, usually followed by "wait until they get in the real world".
You'll never guess what happened when they got into the real world.
Mike (MJB Wolf) said...
"Hmmm...I wasn't aware that Musk had fanboys.
Whatever happened to simply admiring accomplishments? Is it now like the desire to make America great with America-first type policies? Is it overtly political to favor transparency and free speech?"
Exactly.
Hell, Ann. I like and admire what you've done here. I talk you up to other people who like good, informed argument. Like Protien Wisdom.
I don't know you. I don't know Jeff Goldstein. And I don't know Elon Musk.
I'm not a "FAN". I jut like what you all do.
("I would never belong to any organization that would have me as a member.")
"Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?"
If the whinging lefties in question had the capacity to debate effectively the censorship would likely be unnecessary.
A general amnesty is not a good idea, but when you consider how Wikipedia uses charges of "persistent vandalism" to ban contributors, it's possible to wonder just how real the "threats" and "harassment" really were.
The hell the anti-Muskites are afraid of — isn't it just the loss of a political advantage they never should have had in the first place?
They Hell they fear is the Hell of having to face all of those people you've gotten banned through lies, subterfuge and ginning up Twitter Mobs. Lorenz, on some level, knew that karma is one mean bitch, but she always counted herself too smart to get caught by the blowback. Guess she miscalculated.
Catholic lore says Christ "harrowed" Hell after his death, before his resurrection, redeeming the souls of those righteous persons who died before his birth.
"Opening the gates of Hell" is thus ambiguous, either allowing the damned to flee eternal banishment, or allowing the rest of humanity into Hell to suffer as do the damned. Perhaps in this case much of both.
Pay closer attention.
@Althouse, I am paying very close attention. That my conclusions are at variance with your self-image doesn’t invalidate those conclusions.
If you think there are 2 camps, and everyone is in one or the other, you are certain to misread me.
Where did I imply that I think that?
What you've seen on other occasions is my scorn for Musk's fanboys.
Actually some of us tried to explain to you that the New York Times articles, to which you relentlessly linked, were considerably at variance with the expectations of life in an entrepreneurial high-tech organization. In fact I have some recollection that I expressed the opinion that Musk might or might not be successful, but he was making the right moves. What you called “work-life balance” is, to me, a lack of commitment to the success of the enterprise. If that makes me a Musk fanboy, then have your eyes checked.
Temujin,
An app doesn't need to be in an app store. I have several apps on my phone that I downloaded and installed with no more trouble than going through a store (Parler, TubeMate, a timer and a couple others)
There are also a number of other apps, HootSuite is one I have used, that can be used for Twitter instead of the Twitter app. Ban those too? And apps that are already on the phone could not be removed.
It would be a minor inconvenience for those wanting Twitter.
It would be a big danger to Apple/Google for people to find out that they don't need to download apps through the store. Someone else could set up a competing site to aggregate and distribute apps outside the store.
There is also the anti-trust issue if both do it.
Europe has told Elon that he needs to be careful that he does not fall foul of their laws. He said that he might just close down all European opertions so they have no jurisdication. The Euroweenies are upset and have promised to taunt him mercilessly and fart in his general direction if he does.
https://techcrunch.com/2022/11/24/elon-musk-twitter-layoffs-eu-dsa-vlop-warning/
John Henry
Said one of the experts quoted ...
If Musk hadn't bought twitter, we never would have known how many experts there are.
Some alternatives for Twitter are:
Gab
Truth Social
Parlor
https://social.infogalactic.com/
Mastadon
I don't know why, but I could not find number of user comparisons.
One article mentioned Truth Social has 10X the users of Parlor, about 500,000 active users per day.
https://www.arabianbusiness.com/industries/technology/5-twitter-alternatives-mastadon-parler-truth-social-and-more-social-media-apps-you-can-download-today
“Said one of the experts quoted — by Taylor Lorenz — in "'Opening the gates of hell': Musk says he will revive banned accounts/The Twitter chief says he will reinstate accounts suspended for threats, harassment and misinformation beginning next week" (WaPo).”
Misinformation is the big one. No one really cares, I think, if people are banned for real threats (many of those thus banned weren’t actually threatening their targets with physical violence). But misinformation probably means such things to people like her as: the Bidens were bought by the Ukrainians and Chinese; his election was fraudulent, while Hunter’s laptop is real, his Chinese created COVID-19 (with Fauci led US financial help) virus, that the COVID-19 experimental artificial mRNA Gene Therapy Products, aka COVID-19 vaccines, are neither safe nor effective, that the Russians were working with Clinton, and not Trump, and her thousands of violations of the Espionage Act and records act should have resulted in her incarceration for the rest of her life, etc. The standard appears to be that if it is detrimental to top Dems, or Dem programs, it is Misinformation. Let me add that suppression of misinformation, as was done on Twitter, has killed a number of people in recent years. A lot of them, but thankfully more leftists, because they are more likely to disbelieve the COVID-19 “misinformation”. Many of us have been hit with way too many deaths this year, and for the healthy ones we lost (most of them), my first question is inevitably whether they were fully Vaxed and Boosted. The COVID-19 vaccines really are killers, and those suppressing the truth about them are likewise killers. Yes, Taylor, you have their blood on your hands too.
"But unless this extreme position changes it will be a very cold sunrise in hell before I can vote for another Democrat again."
That's ok, they no longer need your vote.
“The hell the anti-Muskites are afraid of — isn't it just the loss of a political advantage they never should have had in the first place? Did the censorship they enjoyed only make them soft and fearful and stunt their capacity to debate?”
Exactly. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
“The only danger that Twitter faces is the already mounting whispers to Apple and Google that they must drop Twitter from their app stores. To basically start the process of 'Parlering' Twitter. It would be interesting to see how Elon...and the rest of the world reacts to both Google and Apple in that event.”
If I were Google or Apple here, I would be scared shitless to do that. They are effectively a duopoly (or even limited monopolies, thanks to the Network Effect of their user bases). That means that they are subject to Sherman Antitrust Act §§ 1&2 liability. Sure, the FJB/Garland DOJ isn’t going to go after them. But Musk has, if nothing else, extraordinarily deep pockets, and I think Twitter itself is likely, with his cuts, to have much more cash to throw into an Antitrust case against either company, than they will have cash to defend such. Both face serious financial challenges over the next couple years, that Twitter probably doesn’t (though Google does seem to see the challenges and is trying desperately to “rightsize” to combat them).
"Threats"
"Harassment"
"Misinformation"
One of these is not like the other two.
Typical lefty tactics to conflate them.
"Said one of the experts, quoted by Taylor Lorenz"
That sentence alone represents how lost we are as a culture.
Musk himself has started asking, who are these anonymous "experts". Taylor Lorenz is out of her mind.
Every time I see the word "expert" in an article I think "person with a title whose opinion coincides with the writer's".
Althouse said: "my scorn for Musk's fanboys".
I'd imagine most of Musk's "fanboys" are hard working men that help keep everyone's lights on, fight fires, and do the dirty work to keep food on the tables of America.
I'll never understand why men like this are so reviled by American feminists. Somehow they've convinced themselves these type of men are unneeded, or should at least act subservient and just shut up. There obvious success has helped create the boys of Generation Z.
Musk's "fanboys" aren't kept men, and they certainly aren't beta cucks. I'd also imagine most of the fanboys don't look down on the world from and Ivory tower. But interesting choice of insult.
"Fanboy" has a soft, gay, , sexual, transgender connotation to it. It's not far from "fan-boi" is it?
I guess we can now also refer to the immigrant coders that choose to stay and help Musk transform Twitter into something better for everyone as his fanboys. Why else would they stay???
"911?? There is a fire that started in my kitchen and is spreading quickly. Could you please send a few of Elon Musk's fanboys over to put it out?"
"Oh shit. My car needs repair. I'll have to take it to a garage full of Elon Musk fanboys to get it fixed."
"I like insulting heterosexual men by suggesting the might be sexual subserviates to other men like Elon Musk". Because it's ok when I say it.
Apple and Google should have already been investigated for anti-trust after their Parler stunt. That one was pretty damn unforgivable.
The Woke religion is a secular reincarnation of the worst aspect of Puritan theology: the hard predestination division of humans into the Elect and the Damned. Progressive collapse of the spiritual future into the materialist present means damnation needs to be enacted here on earth for the edification and pleasure of the Elect. Forgiveness of "sinners in the hands of an angry God" has no more place in modern than it had in 17th Century Puritanism.
App store? Who needs middlemen?
“AP store? Who needs middlemen”
You do. For your safety. Realistically, these companies are probably liable for “tying” under Sherman § 2.
I was forced to buy a Windows 11 computer this summer after we got stuck in Las Vegas for a couple months. I knew that it was going to be bad. But I really didn’t anticipate that they were stupid enough to try to force everyone to get their apps from their App Store. This is eerily like when they got caught trying to tie using DOS to Windows (I know the court appointed expert witness who actually found the Windows code that checked to see if Windows 95/98 was running on top of MS/PC DOS or DR DOS, and put out a warning message if it was the latter). They lost. But then, not too long after that, I interviewed for a patent attorney job at MSFT, and the interviewer asked what I thought of their latest EULAs (that gave them a paid up license for the patents and copyrights of the companies that used their software). I responded that do to their monopoly position, it very likely violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. I think the woman interviewing me may have worked on it, given her surprise at my response. This completely surprised me, because I had worked a lot with IBM (esp patent) attorneys, and one of the first things they had to do after joining IBM was to take an antitrust class. The difference is that IBM had effectively won their last antitrust suit, and MSFT had lost theirs.
Talking Musk and Twitter, I found this interesting: Twitter is Banning MAP Accounts and for Some Reason Antifa is Worried
Weird how antifa is worried about accounts dealing in CP getting banned.
…
Really telling that mass banning pedo accounts seems to magically affect so-called “anti-fascists.” Makes you think.
We found with the deceased attackers of Kyle Rittenhouse, that there were a lot of pedos in the AntiFA ranks.
I expect that anything involving gender confusion in kids may be next. Esp gender “affirming” therapy and surgery. Real child welfare seems to be one of his hot buttons. Among all of his flippantly irreverent Tweats, there was a really serious one about his first kid dying in his arms.
We know that this is far-left propaganda because it is written by Taylor Lorenz. Why doesn't the Washington Post know this? (Or maybe they do....) The Washington Post is so afraid of Musk giving a platform to propaganda on political far-right, but they have no problem with giving a platform to propagandists on the far-left.
Bruce,
I agree that I would generally be nervous about downloading an app outside the app store.
But that is because the stores are a trusted source.
If I had to download the Twitter app via web browser from Twitter.com I would feel no risk at all.
Ditto when I downloaded the parler app from the parler website
John Henry
John Henry @ 7:54 asks the question that I've been pondering. Alex Jones is someone I'm aware of only because of his notoriety. Maybe a different type of "check" for the pathological users?
With each meltdown - and no end in sight - the thuggish left continues to prove our point.
Why would you want to keep people in Hell? Why not forgive — if only to give them a second chance?
To be a bit more literal about this, the books Inferno and its sequel Escape From Hell by Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle discuss this subject at length, among other things. Highly recommended, by the way. Not to give too much away, but when the damned are given a chance to escape, they often do not take the opportunity. Sometimes it is because their sins continue to ruin them, and sometimes they are simply too proud or have some other hang up that keeps them where they are. It is amusing that in some cases the damned remain in Hell, but end up in a Hell that they prefer over their original plight.
I remember one dead baby joke, two grape jokes, and two "mommy, mommy" jokes, probably all from the mid-60s.
The grape jokes were pretty innocuous. What's purple and conquered the world? For the math nerds like me, what's purple and commutes?
The others a bit more problematic. The dead baby joke involved soup. The punchline to one of the mommy, mommy jokes was "Shut up and dig." The other mommy, mommy joke involved childhood leukemia.
There may have been a couple of other categories I'm not recalling, setting aside the ubiquitous knock, knock jokes.
--gpm
I remember one dead baby joke,
There were whole books of them in the 1970's. (warning these are gross)
What is the grossest thing in the world?
A pile of 10,000 dead babies.
What's grosser still?
There's a live one in the middle.
What's grosser still?
It's eating its way out.
What's grosser still?
It makes it.
How do you get 10,000 dead babies in a telephone booth?
a blender
How do you get them out?
a straw
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा