ExTwitter CEO Yaccarino Says They Support Censorial KOSA Law And Wants To ‘Make Sure It Accelerates’
from the wtf-does-that-mean? dept
So as you probably know, yesterday, the Senate held one of its semi-regular “let’s call tech CEOs to Congress and make ourselves look out of touch and foolish” hearings. This time the focus of the discussion was on “children’s safety,” but there was little to no discussion on what it actually takes to protect children online. Instead, there was plenty of nonsense grandstanding, misleading claims about Section 230, and lots and lots of baseless accusations.
As we’ve noted, in the last week, both Snap and Microsoft (which wasn’t even testifying) have come out and said they support KOSA, a terrible, dangerous bill that is designed for censorship. Indeed, the leading Republican think tank and the Republican co-author of the bill have both said that why they support KOSA.
Not surprisingly, Senator Blumenthal used his time on the panel to ask everyone whether or not they supported KOSA. Snap’s Evan Speigel said they “strongly support the Kids’ Online Safety Act and we’ve already implemented many of its core provisions.” Most of the others gave some sort of “we like some of the bill, but have problems with other parts of the bill” which is a perfectly reasonable response.
Of course, the ever ridiculous Blumenthal refused to accept those answers. Here was his response to Discord’s Jason Citron who said that “there are parts of the Act that we think are great.”
No, it’s a yes or no question. I’m going to be running out of time, so I’m assuming the answer is no if you can’t answer yes.
Anyone who says that is not someone you can take seriously. People who actually understand the internet (a group that does not include Senator Finsta Blumenthal) are trying to explain that the bill has problems, and Blumenthal is cutting him off saying “it’s a yes or no question” like a total smug asshole who is not there to learn, but just to shame anyone who challenges his authority.
But the funniest bit has to be when they got to Linda Yaccarino, CEO-in-name-only of ExTwitter, who claimed that the company supported KOSA, even though from her answer it is not at all clear that she understands what KOSA is.
Senator. We support KOSA will continue to make sure that it accelerates and make sure it continues to offer community for teens that are seeking that voice.
I mean, what does that even mean? We want to make sure KOSA, a bill that has not yet passed, should “accelerate”? Huh? And that this law, which again, has not passed, must “make sure it continues to offer community for teens that are seeking that voice.” KOSA does not offer community. And seeking what voice?
I mean, literally none of her answer made any sense.
And, of course, remember, that Yaccarino’s boss, Elon Musk, keeps pretending that ExTwitter is the “free speech” platform. Yet, pre-Musk, Twitter was one of the companies that vigorously pushed back on KOSA because of how it would be used to suppress speech and violate the 1st Amendment. And now here’s Yaccarino glibly saying they support this censorial, anti-free speech law, and that they want to “make sure it accelerates.”
Of course, Yaccarino also (falsely) claimed that the company is only 14-months old, which is not how this works.
Being a 14 month old company, we have reprioritized child protection and safety measures, and we have just begun to talk about and discuss how we can enhance those with parental controls.
You don’t get to call yourself a brand new company just because you renamed it. And, Elon has claimed all along that his number one priority was child safety, so even so, you don’t get to show up 14 months later and claim you have now “reprioritized it” without effectively admitting what everyone knew was true: that the company fired everyone working on this issue and didn’t do much at all on it.
At one other point she mentioned that the company supports the STOP CSAM Act (which is terrible in its own way, and has some problematic aspects of EARN IT built in, which makes it weird for ExTwitter to support if they’re truly going to offer encrypted DMs — something that would increase liability massively under STOP CSAM). At that point she also claimed to kinda, maybe, support KOSA? But again, Yaccarino’s style of speaking is to basically word salad everything to the point of meaningless:
X supports the STOP CSAM act. The Kids’ Online Safety Act should continue to progress and we will support the continuation to engage with it and ensure the protections of the freedom of speech.
Yet again, ExTwitter is not a supporter of free speech, and seems entirely out of its depths on any policy matter. Have word salad Linda up there demonstrating how easy it is for politicians to play ExTwitter and get it to endorse any ridiculous policy is just embarrassing.
Filed Under: 1st amendment, free speech, kosa, linda yaccarino
Companies: twitter, x
Comments on “ExTwitter CEO Yaccarino Says They Support Censorial KOSA Law And Wants To ‘Make Sure It Accelerates’”
The more time goes on, the more fitting “Ex-Twitter” actually is.
When politicians say think of the children, or protect the children, they are thinking of the electorate who they consider children to be protected from any ideas that do not fit in with their ideology.
Re:
…such as voting for someone who will actually care about their needs and interests rather than for someone who will only foment mouth-frothing rage at the existent of people who are different and paltry excuses for making billionaires even wealthier.
Re:
But U.S. Senators and Congress-persons are formally selected to exercise their personal judgement in all Federal matters of governance — personal ideology is the basis of such judgement
Do you think that formal concept of U.S. representative government is flawed ?
Re: Re:
The people and culture writ large are not just flawed, but are serious problems.
Ask something else clever.
Re: Re:
“Do you think that formal concept of U.S. representative government is flawed ?”
Gotta ask – Who is being represented?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
Aww too bad, communist.
America is the greatest country in the world. If it wasn’t, hundreds of thousands of foreigners wouldn’t be trying to sneak in here every few months!
Re: Re: Re:2
Okay, Senator McCarthy. Are the communists fluoridating the purity of your bodily fluids?
Sure, it might seem like that if you’ve been force-fed paint chips and patriotism.
Just because it’s a more desirable destination for some doesn’t make it “the best.” People leave the US for statistically better places to live in other developed countries in Europe, so even by your own flawed logic, you’re still wrong.
Re: Re: Re:2
Your reply makes no sense.
Re: Re:
That you think there’s a single, collectively-agreed-upon interpretation of how elected officials should decide matters is telling. When you have a two party system, you’re often voting for the lesser of two evils, not the best possible candidate who actually represents your interests and who you would trust to exercise their personal judgment. When no candidate with a chance of winning adequately represents you, you’d have to conclude that the “formal concept of US representative is flawed.”
Direct democracy would theoretically be preferable, but voters wouldn’t have enough time to research all the issues. Their votes could still be manipulated via misinformation/disinformation and having neutral viewpoints summarizing the issues is an extremely difficult level of media to achieve. I’d prefer parties to be banned so that individual candidates run on their own ideas rather than piggybacking on a party platform that they’ve conformed to for the sake of achieving power. And even then, those who want power shouldn’t be trusted with it, so the best candidates are the ones who won’t ever run for office. It’s a catch-22.
Generally anything involving human judgment is going to be inherently flawed because humans are involved.
Your assertion is also flawed in stating that “personal ideology is the basis of such judgment” when many elected officials demonstrate that they have no ideology beyond wealth and power and the campaign speeches they make have little to do with the actual decisions they make. Politicians who proclaim to want to protect children vote against funding free lunches, health care, and other programs that would actually help children.
Re: Re: Re:
Corollary: In the primaries, you vote for your favorites; in the election, you vote for damage control.
Re:
When politicians say think of the children, Helen Lovejoy’s ghost comes back to haunt Springfield.
Re: Re:
Helen Lovejoy is dead?
Great to know, Yaccarino, that you’re still the CEO!
Well, okay, you may only be the shadow of yourself (more in the shadow of somebody else) and maybe a little too lazy on all your statements, but you keep entertaining us a little bit during the continuous falling of this ex-company.
Don’t worry, I’m sure that 2024 will be a terrific year for your
17-years14 months old company. Just keep working like that!The politicians hate trans people and want to use the Internet as their personal megaphone, the tech CEOs are fine with transphobia and want to lock out any future competition… At what point do these hearings just become kayfabe?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
What’s wrong with hating literal demons?
Re: Re:
hello transphobe
Nothing like a de-facto government sponsored monopoly to derail future competition.
Why do they all suck so bad at this?
Senator: “Do you support the Kids Online Safety Act?”
Tech CEO: “We strongly support policies that protect kids safety online but we do not support the Kids Online Safety Act because it will not protect kids safety online, will do huge collateral damage, and is unconstitutional.”
How fucking hard is that?!
Re: 'No, because I don't hate the first amendment as much as you do.'
Politicians like Blumenthal feel safe acting like a dishonest buffoon precisely because he knows that tech companies lack the spine to say that sort of thing to his face, and will instead bend over backward to avoid even hinting that he’s not acting in good faith
Re: Re:
Any attempt to do that faced demands for a yes or no answer. The article you replied to notes several people tried to make those comments, and were cut off with a demand for yes or no.
Re: Re: Re: 'Senator, yes or no, have you stopped beating your wife?'
At which point if they had a spine they could refuse to play along and point out that he’s not asking a yes or no question.
“No, it’s a yes or no question. I’m going to be running out of time, so I’m assuming the answer is no if you can’t answer yes.”
Might as well,
A heretic Looks at you and says, GOD IS DEAD, yes of no?
Sir, What is your Answer?
Re:
I’m sure he is trying a rehash of the three university presidents show hearing. Not gonna work though.
Are we sure Linda Yaccarino’s brain hasn’t been replaced by a Neural Link bot? Because I did read that they implanted one in somebody.
Re:
Poor Linda, didn’t read the fine print in the CEO offer.
“No, it’s a yes or no question. I’m going to be running out of time, so I’m assuming the answer is no if you can’t answer yes.”
So you’re saying that if I look at your political positions and I like some of them but find others problematic, then I should vote for the other person. Got it. That is what you’re saying, right Senator? It’s a yes or no question.
This is all the same stupid song and dance we had with FOSTA:
Re: Missed the last step
Once the bill takes effect, it turns out all the critics were 100% right and its supporters all have blood on their hands
Re: Re: Bonus effect
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
I just love that you pretend you're nonpartisan.
Or maybe you believe it. That would be worse, actually.
Re:
I’ve read through this post and can not find anything particularly partisan? He mentions Heritage and Blackburn.
But he mocks Blumenthal who is a Democrat.
I guess Mike is a Republican who hates on Democrats?
Re: Re:
Muke has repeated that he has no political ideology, and that he supports what he thinks is best for society as a whole.
Matthew here lies about Mike’s political opinion all the time because he hates people who clearly are not afraid to tell him he’s wrong and homicidally hateful.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
Viewing the world thru partisan shades is no way to go thru life.
Take off the partisan shades.
Would it be too ‘woke’ of you to take a peek every now and then?
Re: Re: Re:2
I have.
You’re lucky Mike frowns upon the shit I’d say to filth like you.
Re: Re: Re:3
“You’re lucky Mike frowns upon the shit I’d say to filth like you”
I am lucky .. but not for the reason you stated – lol.
Sticks ‘n stones, I’m trembling.
You know nothing of me and yet are willing to proclaim all sort of nefarious bullshit. Perhaps that is defamation? Nah, just juvenile angst.
Re: Re: Re:4
You got the right comment, asshole.
I’ve taken off the partisan shades. All I see are assholes. Like you.
And some of these asholes are so high up in power they’re practically untouchable.
You, though? You’re real fucking lucky 1A protects you from the worst I’d LIKE to say to white supremacist filth like you. And I’d prefer to stay in Mike’s good graces.
You can pretend all you want yhour support for a white fascist isn’t gonna affect America and the world. It will come to bite you back in the ass, make no mistake.
I’m from one of those regions where Trump’s non-action resulted in China taking over wholesale. And there’s worse if you even give a fuck to listen to me.
You call it angst, I call it “Karl Marx has a solution to filth like you.”
Re: Re: Re:3
Ok, I replied to the wrong comment.
My bad.
Just as well that we already treat Linda and Elon as a complete joke.
So, about that account/user Elon got reinstated not too long ago...
While I’m sure a good portion of his fans will initially be in favor of the pro-bigotry usages of the bill someone should probably tell Elon that his puppet is pledging the company’s support to a bill that will not only require him to start spending significant amounts of money restaffing the ‘useless’ moderation team part of the company but that will result in the site being sued on a regular basis.
YakYaccarino
Perhaps Yaccarino’s string of gobbledegook is the right response to loaded nonsensical questions from a bunch of technical illiterates, choosing to baffle them with bullsh*t rather than trying to engage them on a more cerebral level, though she is senior management so maybe that’s just how she speaks.
Your “ExTwitter CEO” got me for a minute.
Re:
The problem with that excuse is that even if she was deliberately using the Chewbacca Defense rather than just babbling incoherently in an attempt to say whatever she thought they wanted to heard the method in which she used it was still ‘we absolutely agree with everything you’re saying and will go above and beyond in fulfilling your demands’, which kinda defeats the point.