Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars

Fed up talking videogames? Why?
User avatar
Grumpy David
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Cubeamania

PostRe: Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars
by Grumpy David » Tue Apr 23, 2024 1:12 pm

Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:
No, I don't believe you.


And yet it's what I said.


You are capable of lying and being insincere.

User avatar
Oblomov Boblomov
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Mind Crime, SSBM_God

PostRe: Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars
by Oblomov Boblomov » Tue Apr 23, 2024 1:13 pm

This is the official Elon Musk Hate thread, so we're allowed to ignore things like objective logic and principles if it directly serves the purpose of dunking on the insufferable King of the fedora-wearing misogynists.

Image
User avatar
Moggy
"Special"
Joined in 2008
AKA: Moggy

PostRe: Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars
by Moggy » Tue Apr 23, 2024 1:14 pm

Grumpy David wrote:
Moggy wrote:
Grumpy David wrote:
No, I don't believe you.


And yet it's what I said.


You are capable of lying and being insincere.


Love you too :wub:

User avatar
Benzin
Member
Joined in 2011

PostRe: Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars
by Benzin » Tue Apr 23, 2024 1:27 pm

I'd imagine most countries wouldn't want the entire world to watch real life violent videos on social media. Especially as most footage would be used as evidence in trials.

But that's the hill Muskrat wants to die on due to his "free speech" motif (unless you say something he disagrees with).

User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Elon Musk's a dishonerable sod to give Twitter a billion dollars
by Hexx » Tue Apr 23, 2024 1:39 pm

Hmmm....I wonder why they felt the need to put in place a interim global block...

On the weekend, X said it had complied with the request, but intended to launch a legal case challenging the orders.

In a hearing late on Monday afternoon, barrister for eSafety, Christopher Tran, told Justice Geoffrey Kennett that X had geo-blocked the posts containing the video, meaning Australians could not access them. However, the posts were still accessible globally, and to Australians who used a virtual private network (VPN) connection that made their IP address appear outside Australia.

Tran said that meant that X was not compliant with the online safety act around the removal of the material.

The agency wanted the posts to be removed, with an interim measure for the posts to be blocked from access globally.

X’s legal representation, Marcus Hoyne, sought to have the matter adjourned. He noted that it was close to 2am in San Francisco, where X is headquartered, and he had no instructions from his client on the matter.

Kennett said the “better course” was to make the interim order until a later hearing, and ordered the content be put behind a notice globally, with the interim order in place until 5pm Wednesday, 24 April Sydney time.

The assistant treasurer, Stephen Jones, on Monday described X as a “factory for trolls and misinformation” as the government vowed to fight any legal challenges brought by the company over removal orders related to the video of the Wakeley stabbing.


Aus wants it banned in Aus (ignoring the fact they want it taken down, and the block is a interim measure)

X says they can't just ban it in Aus due to how VPNs etc work.

Aus therefore says if you have to ban it in the rest of the world to enforce our ban in Aus, so be it.

What's the controversy?

Seems utterly reasonable then to meet the actual order given what X will/won't do. Aus are saying the rest of the world can't see it, just that they expect X to follow the rulings on Aus. Anything else is a secondary consequence.


Not surprising some of the regular "characters" jumping on Musk's bandwagon though,


Return to “Stuff”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addsy087, Edd, Garth, Grumpy David, Joer, Lex-Man, mcjihge2, Memento Mori, Met, more heat than light, poshrule_uk, Tineash and 360 guests