I understand it’s not how things are being done currently at Twitter, but In what way would it be a public square? Or what is some ways to reflect a public square?
I think it would need to be owned by the public (us) to be a public square.
What else is owned in private that is referred to as a public asset. I think it’s an oxymoron and cannot exist.
There are privately owned public spaces. A lot of times developers get density bonuses for maintaining a privately owned public space. You also get density bonus for providing affordable, etc. Its a trade off. Anyway, its not a traditional public square, its a virtual public square and laws need to catch up because something like monopolistic Facebook and twitter weren't always around.
I understand it’s not how things are being done currently at Twitter, but In what way would it be a public square? Or what is some ways to reflect a public square?
I think it would need to be owned by the public (us) to be a public square.
What else is owned in private that is referred to as a public asset. I think it’s an oxymoron and cannot exist.
There are privately owned public spaces. A lot of times developers get density bonuses for maintaining a privately owned public space. You also get density bonus for providing affordable, etc. Its a trade off. Anyway, its not a traditional public square, its a virtual public square and laws need to catch up because something like monopolistic Facebook and twitter weren't always around.
I agree, virtual laws do need to catch up. America is pretty behind on reigning in big tech especially when it comes to privacy issues.
Almost everyone recognizes problems with privacy, and problems with the way facebook/IG/twitter pushes people to stay on the device all for more revenue ad. But at the same time at congressional meetings continue to suck up to apple/facebook/google as they have the biggest coffers.
Almost everyone recognizes problems with privacy, and problems with the way facebook/IG/twitter pushes people to stay on the device all for more revenue ad. But at the same time at congressional meetings continue to suck up to apple/facebook/google as they have the biggest coffers.
If Musk actually follows through on the Twitter thing, a lot of politicians that were cool when Twitter was banning political opponents might actually decide it is time to do something about big tech. And again, it is a de facto public square, that Musk has right.
Almost everyone recognizes problems with privacy, and problems with the way facebook/IG/twitter pushes people to stay on the device all for more revenue ad. But at the same time at congressional meetings continue to suck up to apple/facebook/google as they have the biggest coffers.
If Musk actually follows through on the Twitter thing, a lot of politicians that were cool when Twitter was banning political opponents might actually decide it is time to do something about big tech. And again, it is a de facto public square, that Musk has right.
Jack Dorsey is on board with a Musk takeover as well.
Who to ban, who not to ban is always going to end up being subjective.
Do we ban stalkers, does he ban people who harass people. There is a big issue with suicide amongst teens that has been increasing in a large part from social media bullying. Do people face consequences for being bullies - and then who decides what is being a bully.
If a kid whose mother died of cancer has someone who hates him go on twitter and shows makes an edited video of someone fornicating with his mother's corpse (but doesn't show any nudity), do we ban said person?
I think he's talking about making twitter users less anonymous as well - or I heard that somewhere. I think that would be good.
Or maybe a cultural shift to taking people who are not anonymously more seriously than those who are anonymous... as it could just be a Saudi Prince bot pushing pro muslim/dictator agendas.
Jack Dorsey is on board with a Musk takeover as well.
Who to ban, who not to ban is always going to end up being subjective.
Do we ban stalkers, does he ban people who harass people. There is a big issue with suicide amongst teens that has been increasing in a large part from social media bullying. Do people face consequences for being bullies - and then who decides what is being a bully.
If a kid whose mother died of cancer has someone who hates him go on twitter and shows makes an edited video of someone fornicating with his mother's corpse (but doesn't show any nudity), do we ban said person?
I think he's talking about making twitter users less anonymous as well - or I heard that somewhere. I think that would be good.
Or maybe a cultural shift to taking people who are not anonymously more seriously than those who are anonymous... as it could just be a Saudi Prince bot pushing pro muslim/dictator agendas.
First Amendment laws in public squares aren't so subjective. Bullying isn't a protected right. Arguing something like climate change or covid isn't as controversial legally.
Are liberals still crying about a comedian's podcast spreading what they decide is 'misinformation'? Spoitify is now sponsoring Barcelona's shirt. Begs the question, who has more fake followers, barcelona or hillary? Probably Barca in numbers, Hillary in percentage.
Jack Dorsey is on board with a Musk takeover as well.
Who to ban, who not to ban is always going to end up being subjective.
Do we ban stalkers, does he ban people who harass people. There is a big issue with suicide amongst teens that has been increasing in a large part from social media bullying. Do people face consequences for being bullies - and then who decides what is being a bully.
If a kid whose mother died of cancer has someone who hates him go on twitter and shows makes an edited video of someone fornicating with his mother's corpse (but doesn't show any nudity), do we ban said person?
I think he's talking about making twitter users less anonymous as well - or I heard that somewhere. I think that would be good.
Or maybe a cultural shift to taking people who are not anonymously more seriously than those who are anonymous... as it could just be a Saudi Prince bot pushing pro muslim/dictator agendas.
First Amendment laws in public squares aren't so subjective. Bullying isn't a protected right. Arguing something like climate change or covid isn't as controversial legally.