• downpunxx@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    Biz Stone, who allowed Nazis to run rampant on Twitter, so he could monetize it and sell it to Elon Musk? That motherfucker? Man, Mastodon first selling out to META in a closed door non disclosure pow wow, now this. The Mastodon folks wanna get paid. Alas, and so it goes…

    • meteokr@community.adiquaints.moe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      What do you mean by Mastodon selling out to Meta? Isn’t Meta just building an ActivityPub based platform so we can talk to their users as far as I know. If they want to talk to us, then the onus is on Meta to stay compatible. If they aren’t, then we just continue on as we have.

      • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I view the bigger issue as Meta is hostile towards humanity’s privacy and freedom, and Mastodon leadership view Meta joining the Fediverse as an unqualified win. Meanwhile, I don’t think Meta is interested in ActivityPub as a protocol to make Instagram Threads more appealing, I think they’re overall much more interested in what data the can gain, and sell, analyzing the interactions between their own user pool and the rest of the fediverse that user pool interacts with.

      • JayTreeman@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Please look up ‘embrace, extend, extinguish’ Meta should be met with open hostility in the fediverse. Mastodon losing nonprofit status in Germany, moving to the states and then appointing this guy leads me to think that mastodon has been compromised

    • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 months ago

      Were Nazis allowed to deliberately ‘run rampant’ on Twitter pre-Elon? That’s a hot take.

      Musk’s buying Twitter had nothing to do with it being ‘monetised’ as far as I see. Musk just offered such a stupidly large amount that the board had to say ‘OK, sure.’

      • Corgana@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        They absolutely were, without question. That said, there’s nothing this guy can do to make that happen on Mastodon instances he doesn’t own.

        • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 months ago

          Just a quick reminder that Twitter was banning 10s of thousands of accounts of extremists that breached its terms of service, including a certain ex president of the US. It was imperfect, but ‘running rampant’ is a stretch

          • The Cuuuuube@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            How many times did Trump show his true colors before getting banned? Twitter’s moderation policies were better pre-Musk but they were far FAR from acceptable.

          • Corgana@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            It seems like we agree on the facts, and I certainly won’t disagree that it’s worse now, but I would characterize Twitter’s (pre-Musk) response to extremism as “measured, lacking and lethargic”, before I would use “imperfect”, which still implies “pretty good” and from my perceptive it was not good enough to make me want to use it. I think maybe we just have a different tolerance for hate speech.