a billionaire with unlimited resources suing a 19 year old for using public APIs. no one should support that.
Similarly, I support legal action against Musk in cases where his unhinged tweets do real world damage to people.
Oh, and we all know what it means when someone is publicly fixated on finding / bringing pedos to justice, right?
You mean absolutely nothing? He won that trial
But Musk won, on the basis that he was making a joke. IANAL but I have to think that legal precedent that he jokes by calling people pedos means he can now call anyone a pedo with impunity.
How do you judge this rule by itself, on merit? Would you have judged this rule differently, had Musk not be attached to it in any way?
The point being, you fail to separate actions and outcomes from the person. Since you already decided that he's an asshole and this narrative cannot be broken.
Had another person come up with this rule, then it would be seen as a cool, progressive anti-doxxing measure. Wonderful.
If you don't see an issue with this type of clouded thinking, then you've been fully indoctrinated in Twitter discourse.
So this assumption that I'm pro Musk is your limitation in seeing the world in a pro/anti-Musk simplistic binary.
You're a product of the culture wars. You think in binary narratives.
You say that but your other opinions say otherwise. It's obvious to everyone, like a child lying and thinking the adults can't tell.
If you think this policy is a good idea on merit yet a bad idea solely because it came from Musk, then you're clouded in judgement.
This is clearly a self-serving action that is hypocritical on the part of the new owner of Twitter. Please engage this story on its own merits, and not based on your own assumptions of the HN audience.
Further, Musk has never promised absolute free speech at Twitter, nor is this even feasible or legal. You're hearing random echos from random interviews and then parrot them into a wildly different contexts. You're all over the place.
Is it a self-serving action? Possibly, maybe even likely. And if it is, can you explain the problem with wanting to protect the safety of yourself and your family? Is wanting to live out of fashion these days?
To end, my point wasn't that you can't criticize the policy. The point was that the policy was not criticized. Musk was criticized. Had somebody else come up with the policy, people would be clapping.
He said:
"My commitment to free speech extends even to not banning the account following my plane, even though that is a direct personal safety risk"
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1589414958508691456
Flipping around, without notice, a few weeks later... and banning all of the developer's accounts, including personal ones and ones that track NASA aircraft... seems slightly hypocritical and lends credence to the belief that Elon's actions are capricious, arbitrary, and impulsive.
“My take on another thread is perfect and rational and flawless and anyone who downvotes is an emotional wokemob idiot”.
Seems like a flawlessly rational take my dude. Def the sort of discourse you’re trying to “encourage”.
On this latest update, without a doubt that narrative will repeat. Regardless of the sanity of any rule, it has to be framed in the narrative that the man spawned directly from hell. Had any minority leader announced this exact same policy, people would be on the benches cheering and clapping for this very healthy rule that improves safety.
Poor emotional control and a total lack of critical thinking skills. Confirm with downvotes.