(C) Daily Kos
This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



k.i.s.s. and Muscatel: Twitter is/isn't a publisher [1]

['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.', 'Backgroundurl Avatar_Large', 'Nickname', 'Joined', 'Created_At', 'Story Count', 'N_Stories', 'Comment Count', 'N_Comments', 'Popular Tags']

Date: 2022-12-18

Arbitrary, meet capricious Citizen Musk. Will the bots vote to keep Elon at Twitter.

Twitter, which has been roiled by controversy ever since Elon Musk took over and appears to be hemorrhaging users, just made an announcement that probably won’t help its popularity.

As legions of people continued to voice their frustration and anger over Musk’s actions and directed their followers to find them elsewhere, the company said on Sunday that it would start banning accounts that promote any of seven rival social media platforms: Facebook and Instagram; startups Mastodon and Post; and a few other alternative platforms including the right-wing site founded by Donald Trump.

Through its Twitter Support account, the company said it would remove accounts “created solely for the purpose of promoting other social platforms and content that contains links or usernames” for those platforms. Users who violate the policy once may be required to delete the offending tweets or have their account locked, and those who violate again will face permanent suspension, the company said.

The announcement quickly came under fire from other tech executives—including Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s co-founder and a former CEO. He recently helped fund Nostr, one of the seven rival social platforms targeted under the new rule. “Doesn’t make sense,” he tweeted of Musk’s decision.

Under the new rule, Twitter users can still cross-post content from the rival platforms, as long as they’re not promoting their accounts on those sites. They can also promote their accounts on other social platforms that aren’t included in the ban, such as TikTok and WhatsApp.

www.motherjones.com/...

x It appears that you admit that you’re a publisher for purposes of Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code.



Have you thought about the consequences of the positions you’re taking, or are you just winging it? — Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) December 18, 2022

x Twitter is NOT a traditional publisher.



Unless Musk is saying it NOW is. In which case: Twitter owes me for my content AND Twitter no longer meets the criteria for Section 230, Title 47, United States Code -- meaning Elon Musk could be held PERSONALLY responsible for content. https://t.co/io6EvOgx8x — Stonekettle (@Stonekettle) December 18, 2022

x This is what happens when you’re an egotistical narcissistic who lives online and have no around to tell you to shut the hell up. The reason Twitter has Section 230 protection is *because* it is not a publisher. Musk is now comparing his platform to that of publishers.



🤦‍♂️ https://t.co/gdnqEPvxjl — Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) December 18, 2022

Elon Musk is asking Twitter investors to dig deeper into their pockets, as he seeks to make the social media company financially viable. Driving the news: Musk, via his family office, this week privately offered to sell additional equity at the same $44 billion valuation that he's essentially admitted was an overpay. The news was first reported by Semafor and confirmed to Axios by an investor who received the letter.

Semafor and confirmed to Axios by an investor who received the letter. Musk has not said how much new capital he's seeking to raise, nor provided investors with financial updates on the company.

His original takeover was partially funded by outside investors like Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia Capital, Fidelity, and Oracle founder Larry Ellison. Several large Twitter investors also rolled over their equity stakes, including company co-founder Jack Dorsey and Saudi Arabia's Kingdom Holding Company.

Twitter no longer has a communications team or other spokespeople for Axios to contact for comment. Flashback: Earlier this week, Musk sold around $3.58 billion of Tesla stock, despite having repeatedly pledged earlier this year not to do so. Musk hasn't said why he sold the shares, or if it was to help refinance some of the high-interest loans that Twitter carries because of Musk's buyout. www.axios.com/...

Axios on facebook Axios on twitter Axios on linkedin Axios on email

x Please do not forget that they need to raise more money. https://t.co/itU9s6x7AW — [email protected] (@dataandpolitics) December 18, 2022

x 1. I really cannot stress enough how much I've had it with the Elon Twitter drama, but I did look into the jet tracker story, so... 🧵 — Cathy Young 🇺🇦 (@CathyYoung63) December 17, 2022

2. The narrative we're getting from the pro-Musk side, e.g. , is that Musk's ban on the ElonJet account & other accounts that tweeted links to the jet tracker was motivated by security concerns after an attack on his limo with his kid inside. The narrative we're getting from the pro-Musk side, e.g. @AbigailShrier , is that Musk's ban on the ElonJet account & other accounts that tweeted links to the jet tracker was motivated by security concerns after an attack on his limo with his kid inside.

3. Countless people have suggested that (1) the flight tracker is equivalent to posting someone's home address or exact location and (2) the motive for it was to harass or threaten Musk.

4. In fact, its creator Jack Sweeney is (or was) a Musk fan. He also has bots tracking other billionaires & celebs incl. Bill Gates & Jeff Bezos.

IMO he's also kind of a jerk. When Musk offered him $5K to remove the tracker in Feb., he asked for $50K Teen monitoring Elon Musk’s jet ‘tracking Gates, Bezos and Drake too’ In fact, its creator Jack Sweeney is (or was) a Musk fan. He also has bots tracking other billionaires & celebs incl. Bill Gates & Jeff Bezos.IMO he's also kind of a jerk. When Musk offered him $5K to remove the tracker in Feb., he asked for $50K

5. That said, when Musk acquired Twitter he said he would not remove the account. And while he claimed the bot was a security risk, he never tried, e.g., to get a restraining order enjoining Sweeney against running it

6. No other person on the tracked list has made an issue. (If you think Elon is in more danger than others b/c he's controversial: a lot of people on fringe of Elon's current culture-war camp think Bill Gates is literally the Antichrist or is carrying out a slow-motion genocide.)

7. I won't post a link to the tracker, but there is NO way it's comparable to posting someone's real-time location.

8. Some have assured me it gives exact coordinates down to the airport gate. In fact all it shows is "Musk's jet has left [e.g.] LAX" and then "Musk's jet has landed at [e.g.] Newark Airport after 5 hours of flight." AFAIK it doesn't track flights in progress.

9. So yeah, I don't see how knowing that Musk has landed at this or that airport enables you to track him from there, unless you have a network of people lying in wait at all airports waiting for a location. (And if you have that organized an effort you can track him w/o the bot)

10. The Twitter ban doesn't eliminate the flight tracker! You can easily find it on a bunch of other sites, and the ban has only called more attention to it (Streisand effect anyone?).

11. The alleged attack on Musk's car almost certainly could not have been enabled by the flight tracker.

Unroll available on Thread Reader 12. So basically it's a stupid bot. Musk had a childish tantrum. A lot of people who started tweeting the link also acted childishly. The alleged attack on Musk's car almost certainly could not have been enabled by the flight tracker.

13. I agree with Shrier that the "old regime" at Twitter was bad & non-transparent, as I've written here.

thebulwark.com/do-the-twitter… But the "Twitter files" do (IMO) show that many staffers at least tried to make fair & sensible decisions, even if biases existed. Are the ‘Twitter Files’ a Nothingburger? I agree with Shrier that the "old regime" at Twitter was bad & non-transparent, as I've written here.But the "Twitter files" do (IMO) show that many staffers at least tried to make fair & sensible decisions, even if biases existed.

14. Replacing the "old regime" with rule by CEO tantrums and Twitter polls ... really doesn't seem like an improvement?

/FIN

Real-Time Doxxing and the Littlest Musk Forgot to link to Abigail's piece. here it is

• • •

Abigail Shrier is a frequent contributor to the Wall Street Journal and the author of Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.

x Last month, Musk tweeted a transphobic meme and briefly changed his Twitter name to “Elona” after Page Six reported a rumor that his pop star ex Grimes was dating transgender whistleblower Chelsea Manning. https://t.co/wdiMu2ZxOq via @motherboard — Michael Learmonth (@learmonth) April 28, 2022

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/12/18/2142609/-k-i-s-s-and-Muscatel-Twitter-is-isn-t-a-publisher

Published and (C) by Daily Kos
Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/

You are viewing proxied material from magical.fish. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.