𝕏 / Twitter / X, the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter / "MUSK OWNS TWITTER"

[Catch The Rainbow]

 

[CaptainAutism69]

People have sides in this? I'm just munching on popcorn and watching the glorious meltdowns

 

[CervixHammer]

serves him right for streaming with Keffals.

 

[ScooterL]

These journos never ever thought this would happen to them; they act like vicious badgers because there are never any consequences and their disbelieving shock is an amazing early Christmas present. I don’t give a shit about Twitter but it’s where they live.

Amazing.

Edit: it’s a private company!!!
View attachment 4083450

 

[alpha889boba]

Elon is a sperg and posting public tracking information of aircraft is not really doxxing. He is a hypocrite but at least he is destroying twitter in the process taking the asylum down with him. He is much better at enabling intelligent people to work on amazing things others wouldn't risk financial ruin to accomplish like SpaceX than being highly intelligent himself.

 

[Catch The Rainbow]

View attachment 4087950
serves him right for streaming with Keffals.

also a well known taylor lorenz simp

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-63996061

The EU has threatened Twitter owner Elon Musk with sanctions after several journalists covering the company had their accounts abruptly suspended.
Reporters for the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post were among those locked out of their accounts.
EU commissioner Vera Jourova said the EU's new Digital Services Act requires "the respect of media freedom".
The German Foreign Office also warned Twitter that "press freedom cannot be switched on and off on a whim".
Commissioner Ms Jourova said the news about the suspension of journalists on Twitter was "worrying".
"[The] EU's Digital Services Act requires respect of media freedom and fundamental rights. This is reinforced under our Media Freedom Act," she said.

"Elon Musk should be aware of that. There are red lines. And sanctions, soon."
Mr Musk tweeted that accounts which he claimed engaged in doxxing - a term to describe to the release of private information online about individuals - receive a temporary seven-day suspension.
"Same doxxing rules apply to 'journalists' as to everyone else," he tweeted.
A Twitter spokeswoman earlier told tech website The Verge that the ban was related to the live sharing of location data.
Mr Musk took control of Twitter in October in a $44bn ($36bn) deal.
A spokesman for the New York Times called the suspensions "questionable and unfortunate".

It comes after Mr Musk vowed to sue the owner of a profile that tracks his private jet.
He said said a "crazy stalker" had used live location sharing to find and accost a vehicle carrying his children in Los Angeles.
On Wednesday, Twitter suspended the account @ElonJet, as well as the personal account of its owner Jack Sweeney, 20.
Mr Musk has since vowed to take legal action against him, as well as "organizations who supported harm to my family".


The EU sanctions could be applied under a new Digital Services Act, which is currently going through the EU Parliament but could be in force by next year.
Under the terms of the proposed new law, the EU Commission will be allowed to impose fines of up to 6% of the global turnover of a firm that it finds breaks its rules.

In extreme cases, the EU could ask a court to suspend a rogue service, but only if it is "refusing to comply with important obligations and thereby endangering people's life and safety".
The German Foreign Office tweeted out a warning to the social media platform, writing: "Press freedom cannot be switched on and off on a whim."


Matt Binder, a journalist for Mashable and one of those suspended, said he didn't know why he had been banned.
"I've been very critical of Musk in my reporting," he told the BBC. But he said that Mr Musk's claim "that everyone that got suspended was doxxing him - due to the jet tracker", was not true.
He said he had never tweeted a hyperlink to the tracker, but had mentioned the account after it had been suspended.
"Clearly the people who were suspended were handpicked, because there are literally hundreds of accounts per minute who tweeted the link."


Mr Binder, who has been on Twitter since 2008 and has been reporting on the developments at the social media site, said he was surprised at the ban on journalists.
"I knew it was a possibility but really thought he wouldn't because it would entirely wreck the facade of being a free speech platform."
Twitter's head of trust and safety, Ella Irwin, told The Verge that bans are related to a new rule introduced on Wednesday that prohibits "live location information, including information shared on Twitter directly or links to 3rd-party URL(s) of travel routes."
"Without commenting on any specific accounts, I can confirm that we will suspend any accounts that violate our privacy policies and put other users at risk," Mrs Irwin told the outlet.
"We don't make exceptions to this policy for journalists or any other accounts."


When he completed his takeover of the social media site, Mr Musk told advertisers he bought Twitter because he wanted to "try to help humanity", and for "civilisation to have a digital town square".
Mr Musk has not commented directly on the suspensions, but said in a tweet that "criticising me all day long is totally fine, but doxxing my real-time location and endangering my family is not".
Mr Musk later spoke to journalists on Twitter Spaces, part of the social media app that allows live audio conversations.
His short appearance generated an audience of 30,000 but after answering a few questions about the ban he left and Twitter Spaces itself has since appeared to be suspended.
The technology tycoon later set up a poll asking whether he should unsuspend the accounts "now" or "in seven days", suggesting the decision could be reversed sooner rather than later.
Twitter also suspended the official account of Mastodon, which has emerged as an alternative to Twitter since Mr Musk's takeover.
It came after Mastodon used Twitter to promote Mr Sweeney's new account on Thursday, according to the New York Times.
Links to individual Mastodon accounts also appeared to be banned. An error message notified users that links to Mastodon had been "identified" as "potentially harmful" by Twitter or its partners.

At the heart of all this is a father raging about the sharing of location data of his private jet, which he claims led to a security incident involving his young son X. The Twitter feed that started it all was scraping publicly available flight data. Not very decent, perhaps, but not illegal.
His fury has now extended to journalists who he claims also shared his location.
But this is a fundamentally flawed approach to moderation. I bet many of us wish we could suspend or ban social media accounts that post content we dislike.
It's not the first time Elon Musk has taken a very personal approach to content moderation. He refused to allow Infowars conspiracy theorist Alex Jones back on Twitter because he had used the death of children to further his career - and mentioned the loss of his own child, 10-week-old Alexander.
He has also suspended accounts which impersonated him.
Fundamentally, Elon Musk has shot down in flames his much-trumpeted commitment to "free speech". Free speech as long as it doesn't upset him personally, appears to be the message.

bbc and euros crying about free speech is hilarious. Where was that media freedom when the Cologne rapes by syrian refugees happened?

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

What's with all the "Elon is a hypocrite, this isn't free speech" seething?

It mainly comes from people who are mad that people they like politically (specifically in terms of left-of-center or left-wing politics) are getting banned. There's no reason anyone could bring up for these bans that would make them not say "WTF what happened to 'free speech' bro", so it's purely a bad faith argument.

 

[SBG]

Elon is a sperg and posting public tracking information of aircraft is not really doxxing. He is a hypocrite but at least he is destroying twitter in the process taking the asylum down with him. He is much better at enabling intelligent people to work on amazing things others wouldn't risk financial ruin to accomplish like SpaceX than being highly intelligent himself.

It looks like it wasn't that public.

FAA Privacy ICAO Program Gains Foothold, But Extent Limited Thus Far - Avionics International

Last November, New Hampshire-based Private Jet Services (PGS) Group warned that aviation hobbyists, crowdsourced websites, and hackers were intercepting flight data using private Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers—available for as […]

www.aviationtoday.com

FAA Privacy ICAO Program Gains Foothold, But Extent Limited Thus Far​

Last November, New Hampshire-based Private Jet Services (PGS) Group warned that aviation hobbyists, crowdsourced websites, and hackers were intercepting flight data using private Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers—available for as little as $199 from Amazon—and broadcasting the information online. The aviation consultancy said that such receivers, along with a “deeper level of positional data and a tail number,” could allow real-time flight tracking of corporate executives and other VIPs.

The Washington Post, through some sleuthing, was able to chronicle the 150,000 miles that the Gulfstream G650 belonging to SpaceX and Tesla founder Elon Musk traveled on in 2018, as well as the miles logged by a Gulfstream belonging to Jeff Bezos, the owner of The Washington Post and founder of Amazon and Blue Origin.

To allow aircraft owners to limit the availability of real-time ADS-B position and identification information, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) began a Privacy ICAO Address (PIA) program last December for U.S. registered aircraft equipped with 1090 MHz ADS-B and using a third-party call sign in domestic U.S. airspace. The program allows such owners to request an alternate, temporary ICAO address, which is not assigned to the owner in the Civil Aviation Registry (CAR).

https://twitter.com/scottwww/status/1490553502640140288

https://archive.vn/X1bpB

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

Elon is a sperg and posting public tracking information of aircraft is not really doxxing. He is a hypocrite but at least he is destroying twitter in the process taking the asylum down with him. He is much better at enabling intelligent people to work on amazing things others wouldn't risk financial ruin to accomplish like SpaceX than being highly intelligent himself.

Apparently, it wasn't actually public:

https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1603748611896283137

I don't know what this ultimately means, but it's probably that the "ElonJet" account has done something genuinely criminal under US law.

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

It looks like it wasn't that public.

FAA Privacy ICAO Program Gains Foothold, But Extent Limited Thus Far - Avionics International

Last November, New Hampshire-based Private Jet Services (PGS) Group warned that aviation hobbyists, crowdsourced websites, and hackers were intercepting flight data using private Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers—available for as […]

www.aviationtoday.com

View attachment 4087998

It's the whole "what is doxing" question and nobody really wants to dig deep into it.

Some things are obviously public information and somethings are "quasipublic but not really".

Most everyone even on the notorious doxing website Kiwifarms would agree that hiring goons to literally follow someone around is a bit over the top (and AOC would screetch and die if someone started posting her location)

Musk would have been much more amusing if he just outright admitted he bans whomever he wants whenever he wants lol though that may threaten section 230 protections

I don't know what this ultimately means, but it's probably that the "ElonJet" account has done something genuinely criminal under US law.

There can be all sorts of things that aren't technically illegal but do circumvent protection mechanisms in place. Unless there's a specific federal law that you can't try to determine what PIA things might apply to, you probably are LEGALLY fine even if some people would consider it skeevy.

 

[AgendaPoster]

When she's right, she's right.

Tweets
(A)

 

[Wy4M]

Which one of you bastards did this? This is the former Head of Trust & Safety at Twitter.
Apologize!11!!1
In 2010 someone said that Yoel Roth has the reputation of being a whore and called him a slut!


Yoel took a test on OkCupid and the result said what he already believed: He had the correct amount of sex with the correct number of people.
Yoel never lies to computers.

Yoel's road to emotional recovery from a breakup began with getting a test for Sexual Transmitted Infections.
"sexually-transmitted diseases aren’t karmic, they’re microbial"
The slut conversation did have the effect of bringing up Yoel's own feelings about his sexual past into his present.
Suddenly he felt guilty again about the people he slept with.
Being called a slut was enough for Yoel to make him feel like one.

And nobody could stop Yoel from taking another Sexual Transmitted Infections-test a few weeks later!

Slut | yoyoel.com

archived 15 Dec 2022 14:00:31 UTC

archive.vn

Edit - So to recap:
- Someone called Yoel Roth a slut and a whore.
- To prove this wasn't true Yoel took an online test on OkCupid (yes, on OkCupid!)
- The result said he had the correct amount of sex with the correct amount of people - for him. (whatever that means) Some gays have several partners per month or even per week. Was that his base line?
- To give this test some credibility he says that he never lies to computers.
- Yoel took an STI test, mentions that he took several STI tests in the past. Then he rants about the feelings about his sexual past and that
he feels guilty again about the people he slept with. You usually don't have to post such things if you stay with one and the same partner, don't fuck around or don't behave like a slut.
- Then he concludes that he will have another STI test in a couple of weeks. Again something you don't do if you stay with one and the same partner and don't be a slut.

All of this should be very funny to read until you realize that until 2 weeks ago this person was the former Head of Trust & Safety at Twitter.

Yoel, you slut.

 

[X Prime]

What was it? No bad tactics, only bad targets?

 

[Gar For Archer]

Even on A&H the predominant sentiment is "lol checkmarks assmad" instead of really pretending this is about principles.
I haven't seen the Free Speech sermonizing you're talking about at all. I know it's an easy gotcha, but it's actually got to, well, got to be valid. Everyone's just reveling in people they hate being miserable instead of thinking Twitter's experiencing some huge moral change for the platform.

You gotta give him a break, we’re talking about a guy who argues exclusively against this bizarre strawman conservative that he projects onto anyone who isn’t a far-left loon. Expecting him to actually read what other people are actually saying is a bridge too far.

 

[Iwasamwillbe]

It looks like it wasn't that public.

FAA Privacy ICAO Program Gains Foothold, But Extent Limited Thus Far - Avionics International

Last November, New Hampshire-based Private Jet Services (PGS) Group warned that aviation hobbyists, crowdsourced websites, and hackers were intercepting flight data using private Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) receivers—available for as […]

www.aviationtoday.com

View attachment 4087998

I wonder if Elon Musk actually has grounds to sue people over this. I hope to Yahuwah he does, simply because the result would be very funny either way. Either it's legal to put "public trackers" on people, thus effectively normalizing the doxing of "public figures" (like "journalists"), or it's not, and Elon Musk was 100% in the right to ban the ElonJet account and all the journos that promoted it.

There can be all sorts of things that aren't technically illegal but do circumvent protection mechanisms in place. Unless there's a specific federal law that you can't try to determine what PIA things might apply to, you probably are LEGALLY fine even if some people would consider it skeevy.

I'm sure whether such a thing is more solidly legal or illegal can be hashed out in a court of law.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Which one of you bastards did this? This is the former Head of Trust & Safety at Twitter.
Apologize!11!!1
In 2010 someone said that Yoel Roth has the reputation of being a whore and called him a slut!
View attachment 4088058

Yoel took a test on OkCupid and the result said what he already believed: He had the correct amount of sex with the correct number of people.
Yoel never lies to computers.
View attachment 4088004

Yoel's road to emotional recovery from a breakup began with getting a test for Sexual Transmitted Infections.
"sexually-transmitted diseases aren’t karmic, they’re microbial"
The slut conversation did have the effect of bringing up Yoel's own feelings about his sexual past into his present.
Suddenly he felt guilty again about the people he slept with.
Being called a slut was enough for Yoel to make him feel like one.

And nobody could stop Yoel from taking another Sexual Transmitted Infections-test a few weeks later!
View attachment 4088055

Slut | yoyoel.com

archived 15 Dec 2022 14:00:31 UTC

archive.vn

Yoel, you slut.

You know how you won't need to get or in fact, pay for all those STI tests? Have a stable partner/get married. All that sex will burn your brain, make it difficult later to form a emotional relationship. And I'm saying that as a man. It's nothing but gluttony.

 

[DumbDude43]

posting public tracking information of aircraft is not really doxxing.

if that isn't doxing then neither is posting public information about someones home address (dude phone books lmao)

 

[BULLY HUNTER_78]

Even on A&H the predominant sentiment is "lol checkmarks assmad" instead of really pretending this is about principles.
I haven't seen the Free Speech sermonizing you're talking about at all. I know it's an easy gotcha, but it's actually got to, well, got to be valid. Everyone's just reveling in people they hate being miserable instead of thinking Twitter's experiencing some huge moral change for the platform.

Well, there isn't a reason for us A&H niggers to care. Twitter scum with a blue checkmark and the right politics have rightfully known for years that they could do whatever they want on the platform with no consequences. Keffals and No Dong openly planned blatantly illegal activity with no repercussions. Those of us that even bother to use it have had to make dozens of alts. I know I personally stopped using it after my 3rd or 4th alt - it just got so tiresome to keep creating accounts that immediately got banned.

So now, I'm supposed to cry a river because a handful of journo's got put in glorified timeout for a few days? Why? Isn't Project Veritas still permanently banned for "doxxing" the Vice President of Facebook?

Mainstream journos regularly do this all the time to normies. Remember when CNN threatened to dox some rando for making a Trump wrestling CNN meme? They're just assmad Elon is making some sort of attempt to apply the rules equally. CNN will never be permanently suspended like PV, so I don't understand why leftists are expecting me to grandstand about free speech now. They're still being punished less severely than conservatives. Journoscum are too used to being above the rules.

 

[reptile baht spaniard rid]

I wonder if Elon Musk actually has grounds to sue people over this. I hope to Yahuwah he does, simply because the result would be very funny either way. Either it's legal to put "public trackers" on people, thus effectively normalizing the doxing of "public figures" (like "journalists"), or it's not, and Elon Musk was 100% in the right to ban the ElonJet account and all the journos that promoted it.

I'm sure whether such a thing is more solidly legal or illegal can be hashed out in a court of law.

considering we have evidence that musk was willing to pay to get it to go down (either $5k or $44b depending on who you ask) I'm sure he's at least paid some lawyer somewhere to investigate if suits would be something doable, and received back "er nope".

BUT let it be on the record that I'm always for more lolsuits.

 

[SBG]

I wonder if Elon Musk actually has grounds to sue people over this. I hope to Yahuwah he does, simply because the result would be very funny either way. Either it's legal to put "public trackers" on people, thus effectively normalizing the doxing of "public figures" (like "journalists"), or it's not, and Elon Musk was 100% in the right to ban the ElonJet account and all the journos that promoted it.

I'm sure whether such a thing is more solidly legal or illegal can be hashed out in a court of law.

I'm tempted to say they'd all get away with this.

But I guess there is some goofiness with this whole event since Musk wanting to censor this stuff is based on having some antifa type showing up to harass him while he was with his kid. He possibly could argue that all these journos and Sweeney who knew he just got harassed like that were actively trying to help those wanting to do that harassing.

It's all a bit of a weird situation since Musk sorta has an easier time framing the public conversation about this how he wants thanks to owning his own social media company. Plus he has right wing media that'd find the whole thing hilarious due to getting to the pwn the libs angle.

Edit:

Ben Collins was suspended so hard he's been suspended from appearing on air with NBC news.

Newsrooms are scrambling to counter Elon Musk's bans | Semafor

News organizations are scrambling to respond to Elon Musk’s suspension from Twitter of prominent journalists whose coverage he objected to.

www.semafor.com

Newsrooms are scrambling to counter Elon Musk's bans | Semafor

archived 16 Dec 2022 16:55:24 UTC

archive.vn

NBC News, meanwhile, has responded by suspending one of its journalists who has reported on Twitter and been harshly critical of Musk. NBC News temporarily suspended tech reporter Ben Collins from NBC and MSNBC airwaves. According to two sources, the network told Collins that his criticism of Musk, which included mocking Musk’s ignorance about the company’s general counsel, was not editorially appropriate. Collins continued to tweet his reporting about Twitter last night about the social network’s ban of journalists.

So it seems some outlets are realizing their journos were really sperging out a ridiculous amount online.