Mike Masnick 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (23098) comment rss

  • On the post: Elon Musk’s First Move Is To Fire The Person Most Responsible For Twitter’s Strong Free Speech Stance

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 29 Oct, 2022 @ 11:20pm

    2+2=5! Censorship is free speech!
    Hey Matthew, next time you should try actually reading the piece rather than pretending it said something so you could vent your misplaced anger.

  • On the post: Yes, Chances Are Elon Musk Will Make Twitter Way Worse, But He Could Make It Better

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 29 Oct, 2022 @ 12:39am

    TWITTER IS A PRIVATE COMPANY AND ELON CAN DO WHAT HE WANTS
    Yes. Of course. Who has argued otherwise?

  • On the post: Yes, Chances Are Elon Musk Will Make Twitter Way Worse, But He Could Make It Better

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 28 Oct, 2022 @ 04:56pm

    Mike, why are you so salty about Musk buying Twitter?
    Not salty. It's just a slow motion train wreck in action. From its very first days over 25 years ago, Techdirt mocked tech companies making very, very dumb and avoidable moves. So far, it seems like Musk is going to make some very dumb and avoidable moves. This post is actually hoping that he doesn't do what it looks like he will do, and does something smart. It's possible. Unlikely, but possible.

  • On the post: Elon Musk’s First Move Is To Fire The Person Most Responsible For Twitter’s Strong Free Speech Stance

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 28 Oct, 2022 @ 03:19pm

    Except in the Rekieta Law scandal earlier this month
    The guy who directed his legions of fans to harass people finally got banned. What was the "scandal"?

  • On the post: Elon Musk’s First Move Is To Fire The Person Most Responsible For Twitter’s Strong Free Speech Stance

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 28 Oct, 2022 @ 12:14pm

    A few things this gets wrong.
    No. You just don't understand free speech.
    If a platform censors certain opinions because it believes that it will retain more users that way, it is operating against the principles of free speech, not for them.
    No. It's not. It is operating on the principles of what will enable the most speech on that private property for the purpose the owner created. That ability to determine how to build the community they want is very much operating in favor of the principles of free speech.
    The platform should not interfere with its users.
    But that goes against the principles of free speech by saying that no site should ever curate or provide its own speech or editorial decisions.
    Offering facts, or text boxes, or warnings implicitly denigrates those postings and imposes the platform’s own opinions.
    By ADDING MORE SPEECH. Which is very free speech supportive.
    Moderating for decorum is not the same as censoring opinions, and supposed harm caused when people see opinions with which they disagree is never a reason to violate the principles of free speech. It is possible to both prevent Twitter from becoming an unbridled hellscape and to allow opinions on all sides of gender ideology, religious ideology, and political ideology.
    No one who has ever had anything to do with content moderation of a community would ever say something so totally clueless. But, good luck with your ignorance.

  • On the post: As Big Book Publishers Look To Kill The Internet Archive, It Introduces ‘Democracy’s Library’

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2022 @ 03:46pm

    This very project seems like a good example? It's possible that someday, this kind of library could be taken offline (that's what the publishers are seeking to do with their lawsuit). Using filecoin to back it up makes sure that it can remain available. The problem that so many people have highlighted with today's internet is how it all ends up consolidating into centralized players who then can create gates and silos. Distributing stuff broadly is a way around that. There are ways to do that without cryptocurrency, but cryptocurrency can also work towards that goal when done right. I've never denied that much of it is scammy nonsense. But I'm continually shocked at how people who otherwise seem to get the value of decentralization refuse to admit that this form of decentralization is good. The one thing that cryptocurrency can be good at within the decentralization world, is enabling better coordination. I'm not a big crypto booster (I have tiny, tiny amounts of crypto myself, more just to see how it works, so I have no financial stake in it). But, as a tool to enable greater decentralization it still has tremendous promise.

  • On the post: As Big Book Publishers Look To Kill The Internet Archive, It Introduces ‘Democracy’s Library’

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2022 @ 10:47am

    It feels like Mike views the out-and-out fascism and antisemitism and attacks on democracy running rampant through the U.S., online and offline, as if it’s some grand experiment in online content moderation and protecting democratic norms and speech. Like he doesn’t actually care that people are getting hurt and killed.
    I'm pretty much convinced you have me confused with someone else.

  • On the post: As Big Book Publishers Look To Kill The Internet Archive, It Introduces ‘Democracy’s Library’

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2022 @ 10:46am

    Mike’s latest on his Twitter makes it seem like he’s looking onward at Musk owning the platform like a fascinating experiment in content moderation rather than a clusterfuck of hateful people being given free reign to hurt and harass marginalized folks.
    Lol wut? You might want to check your reading comprehension skills if you came to that conclusion. I expect it to be a total clusterfuck. The only thing I've said is that the people who expect Musk not to own the site are living in a dreamworld, and it's important for people to prepare for that reality. But I actually do feel like it's most likely to be a total clusterfuck of hateful people being given free reign to hurt and harass marginalized folks and have said as much. I still hold out a tiny smidgen of hope that SOMEONE will get it through Musk's skull that such a site would actually be bad for his bank account, but I'm not particularly hopeful. And, I do care about how bad it's going to be because Twitter is an incredibly important and useful site. Though I've also been around long enough to realize that if Musk does fuck it up, as much as I expect him to, hopefully something much better can rise from the ashes. But at the same time I also think it will be important to document what Musk is doing so as to hopefully avoid future such clusterfucks from clueless people like Musk. But, really, given how many people keep complaining that I'm being unfairly critical of Musk, I find it amazing that you think I'm being too kind to him. Do you have me mistaken with someone else?

  • On the post: Republicans Sue Google To Try To Force Spam Into Your Inbox

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2022 @ 10:32pm

    Masnick’s anti-Republican bias is disgusting
    I'm not anti-Republican. I'm anti-idiot doing stupid shit. In the past I've supported politicians from all major parties, and yelled at politicians from all major parties. I've yelled at Democrats and Republicans alike. It's just a question of who's doing stupid, destructive shit. Sometimes it's Democrats and I yell at them for it. Lately, Republicans have taken things to a new level of stupidity, and this lawsuit is just one example. The only "bias" is against stupid shit. Don't want me to mock? Stop doing stupid shit.

  • On the post: As Elon Gets Ready To Take Over Twitter, Bluesky Takes A Big Step Forward

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2022 @ 10:42am

    Mastodon isn't exactly a protocol. ActivityPub is the protocol. Mastodon is an implementation. The Bluesky team is well aware of ActivityPub, how it works... and its limitations (otherwise, they would have just built with it).

  • On the post: Report: Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable By Firing 75% Of The Staff

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2022 @ 04:51pm

    Maybe that was 5% of her job. The remainder was focused on how to censor views with which the management disagreed.
    You really have no fucking clue. You are so wrong it's not even funny.
    This is why you leftists are apprehensive of Musk’s takeover.
    Not sure why I need to keep repeating this but: not a leftist and also not "apprehensive." I just think he's made it clear he has no clue what he's doing.
    You’re not too concerned about spam or bots; you’re worried that a tweet with which you disagree might get thru.
    No. He can do whatever he wants with his platform. I'm not concerned about that.

  • On the post: Don’t Expect The US Government To Actually Stop Elon From Buying Twitter

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2022 @ 02:28pm

    Yes. Ukraine... Fixed now.

  • On the post: Report: Elon Musk Plans To Make Twitter Profitable By Firing 75% Of The Staff

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 21 Oct, 2022 @ 11:40am

    Koby you really are dumber than I thought. The head of trust & safety's job is literally to help figure out how to rid the site of spam and bots. That's like the majority of their job. And I never said that 75% of the company was focused on eliminating spam and bots. Finally, if you think that employees at Twitter are "dedicated to political correctness and virtue signaling" you have been listening to people who are lying to you and you're so gullible, you bought it. Twitter's workforce is like most companies. People are there to do a job and they do it. That's it.

  • On the post: Semafor Joins A Very Broken US Media Industry Claiming To Have Found The Cure For Eroded Trust In News. But Have They Really?

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2022 @ 03:12pm

    Criticizing democrats doesn’t mean that you’re unbiased.
    Everyone is biased. We're biased towards our opinions, based on facts. We've never been pro any particular party. We're not even remotely partisan here. We criticize dumb politicians doing dumbshit stuff. But you have to be totally fucking clueless — something you've demonstrated you are — to think that the dumbshit being done by Democrats and Republicans these days is of the same variety in different directions.
    It just means things are REALLY looking bad for democrats, and you still have a significant left wing slant to your coverage.
    Bullshit. I don't give a shit "how things look" for either party. I'm not concerned about parties. I'm concerned about who is basing policies on actual issues, and who is basing policies on spite. And how the fuck do you think our coverage is "left wing"? Because we criticize Trumpist morons and their nonsense culture wars? That's not being "left wing." We've never been left or right wing. To me, the whole breakdown of "left" and "right" is nonsense.
    Until you drop the “everyone I disagree with is a racist” attitude
    Which we have never, ever done. We call out raicsts for being racists. I don't think everyone who disagrees with me is racist, and the fact that YOU immediately resort to such nonsense shows you have nothing, you know nothing, and the only thing you can do is whine and play victim.
    you leftists are going to suffer from that credibility problem.
    Again, I'm not a leftist, and it's hilarious that you keep calling me a "leftist." My views do not match up in any way with "leftist" politics. That you think anyone basing their writings on actual truth must be leftist says a shit ton about you, and your inability to understand anything. And I have no "credibility" problem. I really have gotten sick of people insisting that because we actually criticize the nonsense you support we must be part of "the other team." We don't believe in teams here. We call things as they are. I'm sorry that your feeble mind can't take that.

  • On the post: Semafor Joins A Very Broken US Media Industry Claiming To Have Found The Cure For Eroded Trust In News. But Have They Really?

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 20 Oct, 2022 @ 12:05pm

    Oh shut the fuck up. We criticize Democrats on Techdirt all the time. We also criticize CNN and MSNBC and other mainstream media outlets. But the simple fact is that the right has lost its fucking mind entirely and ARE pushing fascism and racism as policy. That doesn't mean that the Democrats aren't wrong about a ton of stuff and idiotic, because they are. But they're at least within the bounds of normal political wrongness, and aren't looking to burn down institutions out of spite. Only one side is doing that, and it's worth calling that out.

  • On the post: Ye’s ‘Buyout’ Of Parler Looks Very Much Like A Failed Company Taking Advantage Of Troubled Rich Guy

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2022 @ 12:20pm

    Yup. I think I had gone through it quickly and seen that it got a squiggly and assumed that the autocorrect suggestion was the proper spelling without looking too closely at it... But it's now correct.

  • On the post: John Stossel Loses His Pathetic SLAPP Suit Against Facebook And Fact Checkers

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2022 @ 11:38am

    Tell me again that you're not a pervert and a racist as you post this kind of nonsense? Defending the shooting of Tamir Rice is a new low for you Hyman. Fuck you you terrible piece of shit.

  • On the post: John Stossel Loses His Pathetic SLAPP Suit Against Facebook And Fact Checkers

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2022 @ 11:36am

    Your definition of harassment is telling people truths that they find unpleasant, do not wish to hear, and do not believe.
    Don't pretend that your racism, bigotry and perversion are "truth telling." You may want to believe that to justify the fact that you're an asshole, but you're wrong. You have harassed people on this site. I asked you to stop. And you refuse. Because you are an asshole. Stop it.

  • On the post: John Stossel Loses His Pathetic SLAPP Suit Against Facebook And Fact Checkers

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2022 @ 11:33am

    No, outsourcing censorship to private third parties is not supporting free speech.
    At no point here are we talking about outsourcing to third parties. I don't know why you're bringing in other claims other than as admission that you got nothing.
    Free speech is allowing people to speak freely, not just restraining the government from censoring and silencing people.
    As I have explained, and WHICH YOU ADMIT IMPLICITLY, this is a nonsensical argument. Every private business HAS to have the ability to refrain from being compelled to allow others to speak on their property, otherwise you have no free speech rights. The only way in which free speech makes sense is if you talk about in terms of government censorship. Because private discretion is part of one's free speech rights, and you are arguing to take those rights away. You admit this when you insisted that I would be arrested for painting your home with my own messages. According to you that's censorship. Indeed, you insist that I would be arrested for my free speech rights. What you don't realize is how this proves your entire argument is bunk.
    You don’t want to see that because you like the censorship that the large generic speech platforms are currently providing for you, and the censorship you apply here to popular ideas that you hate.
    You keep making this claim and it's no less stupid the 50th time than it was the 1st. I have long argued that platforms should actually moderate less. And I have regularly called out the mistakes that they make. So fuck off with your made up nonsense about how I approve how they moderate. But what I do not do is insist, idiotically, that they should not do any moderation at all of assholes being assholes. Again, you yourself admit that YOU would moderate to ban speech that involves cursing. That is viewpoint discrimination and against free speech, according to your own definition. You are a hypocrite. I have explained why the rights of private parties and their association rights are KEY to understanding and supporting free speech. You refuse to admit that because you're blinded by your desire to be a pervert and an asshole in places that have asked you to knock it off. So stop your bullshit about that I'm happy with the rights to moderate because I support how they moderate. Hell, my most famous paper is a giant criticism of how they moderate, and you're just too stupid to realize that, and you have so little argument that you have to fucking lie about what I believe and what I say. I have never supported "censorship" in my life. I support free speech, INCLUDING the free speech rights of private parties to say "fuck off, get off my property." You don't. You support censorship.

  • On the post: John Stossel Loses His Pathetic SLAPP Suit Against Facebook And Fact Checkers

    Mike Masnick ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2022 @ 11:19pm

    I don't moderate based on viewpoint. I let the vast, vast, vast majority of your comments through. The only ones that have been blocked are when you go off on perverted rants about your obsession with what's in other people's underwear, which were freaking creepy, and then some of your racist bullshit in defense of cops killing black people. I'm sorry, but I don't want that shit on my site. It's not censorship, it's me telling you to stop being an asshole.

Next >>