The question is, why does he worship Hunter Biden?
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
The question is, why does he worship Hunter Biden?
You've seen the unedited pics right?
What does the Hunter Biden laptop have to do with posting a pic of someone's current location?
You seem to have quoted my post about that topic to chat about some different issue.
To be clear this is what was being discussed:
Edit I think perhaps where you've muddled things is you've looked at the broad Twitter rules re: sharing private media which have been updated to include the above.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2018
- Posts
- 13,316
Finally at the stage of. We didnt mean that sort of free speech.
Yes my bad I tend to skim read this thread
I don't have a major issue with the gps stuff other than they haven't specified what a reasonable time is (also what's the point it's available everywhere even truth social)
Could Elon Jet start posting again with a 24 hour delay or 1 hour delay from landing. Also could it share the live travel without location data ie Elon Jet is taking off from x to y traveling 1600 miles and releases 9 tones of carbon
Then it's going to be super hard to police imagine you get a random selfie with a famous person and you ask if you can stick it on social media they agree and someone reports you for doxing?
Last edited:
You deny seeing the rock of stinking cheese this rule is founded on and lean towards the fog of theory (which I predicted).
The case we have is the reason and the example going forwards, not an invented scenario or a potential related case. We look at the founding ban to see actually relevant evidence for why and how Twitter will implement it.
Deceitful punishment without giving reason (shadowban authorised from a high level exposed by a twitter employee)
Lack of warning. Doubly so as Elon gave a public assurance which was quite the opposite.
Posting of the rule change after permanently banning all accounts.
Elon presenting a bizzare car incident as relevant without any claim or evidence of live tracking yet he threatens legal action against the plane guy who hadn't even posted any plane updates in days.
This is plenty to go on for justifying "ridiculous" and "selectively used". It's a sample of one yet it's the stinking example that Twitter chose to launch this new rule with.
So no, I'm not accommodating the theory of how it could be a powerful tool when the evidence is it's merely a coverup of the whims of a powerful tool.
Well it's obviously not very well thought through as a policy...Elon pulled it out his behind to get at a kid who annoyed him.
Exactly and what if someone reports it and says that's me in the picture I didn't consent to this?
Is the barebones moderation team going to be able to properly investigate everything or are they just going to lean on ban now ask questions later if they go that route then it becomes a tool the left or right could use to constantly punish anyone that shares a pic with location data
Its says not same day in the tweet afterwards:
It's not specific to famous people (though obvs that's perhaps the concern), if someone is consenting to be in your photo then that's rather different to snapping a candid of them out and about without their consent, also, appearances at public events aren't covered.
No, I was simply just discussing the rule as it appeared someone was claiming it was ridiculous so I queried that. I don't find the ranting about Elon stuff particularly interesting and so I even made it explicitly clear I was asking about the rule.
(I appreciate most people on here are low decouplers and can't help it.)
Last edited:
But how do Twitter admins know that consent was verbally given unless the person in question has a Twitter account and says so or something
The scenario is you get a cool selfie with an idol like Hunter and upload it to your Twitter fan base saying look who I bumped into at the Blue Oyster and some bert gets a bit jealous and reports it to the admins saying I'm his security team please take this down what do the admins do, it's time sensitive right so believe the request or try and look into it further. I can just see this being a massive pain
Last edited:
Yes well it seems you're insisting on opposite blinkers to me since I see theoretical musing on rules of privacy and publicity as worth spit when the actual implementation was clearly perverse.
Why does it need to be verbal?
Here is someone consenting to be in a photo:
Here is someone having a candid photo of them taken while clearly not at a public event, just out shopping (their private life).
Is the "cool selfie" you taking a picture of yourself and capturing Hunter in the background? Or has he actively posed with you and ergo consented to be in the photo?
Last edited:
Cool, that wasn't what I was asking about though, you're welcome to have your Elon rants etc.. but it seems a bit futile to reply with them to someone not only asking about something else but specifically stating that that isn't what they're asking about.
Last edited:
Not always that cut and dry just a couple of consenting adults or a photobomb?Why does it need to be verbal?
Here is someone consenting to be in a photo:
Here is someone having a candid photo of them taken:
Is the "cool selfie" you taking a picture of yourself and capturing Hunter in the background? Or has he actively posed with you and ergo consented to be in the photo?
It's very important for people passing by to know that you are fencing off a highly specific scenario of ignoring the events and speculating... "what if the implementation wasn't ridiculous or selectively used" as a basis for arguing that the rule isn't ridiculous or selectively used.
No, I'm not interested in any specific scenarios in particular, I was talking about the rule, nor do I think any of this additional meta-discussion is "very important" at all.
Last edited:
That's a press photo from an Oscars party, seems pretty cut and dry! The issue, again, is privacy...
They've obviously consented as they're at a big event full of celebs and photographers; they're both literally staring at the camera and smiling. That they aren't "together" or one could be said to be photobombing the other is irrelevant.
Last edited:
- Status