I would for the type of characters you describe. Gaining people's trust by telling lies is exactly what a confidence trickster does. There are a lot of them about. Many in politics.

Sales and marketing professionals don't do that. They search for gaps in the market and fill them. They tell people the benefits of things that they might not have realised for themselves.

Making unsubstantiated claims about a product is not only immoral, it's illegal.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Yeah, it's also illegal for pubs to serve drunk people.

Please spare me the pretensions.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Anyway, the fallout over Musk buying Twitter continues to spread.

I have broad agreement with those on the left when they suddenly start complaining that the superrich should not be in charge of big tech companies that effectively own the digital public square.

But oh the timing eh.

On an philosophical level I think it's a general bad direction for cohesive social societal health that oligarchs have the amount of power they have..... As unless that owner is politically neutral a bias emerges that activists within the company inevitably increase....I think that is what happened with Jack Dorsey....Obviously someone who was on the left but also one who I think one who was committed to free speech but ended up suffering from the managerial politicalisation of his company....it seems apparent (not that I'm on Twitter) that he feels his company was stolen away from him by Wall Street and those less interested in Twitter's original values.

However, the double standards are also on display here. It can be observed that it's a bit rich for some on the left to be complaining about the superrich owning the public square when they had no issues with Zuckerberg and Bezos owning Facebook and the Washington Post as those were explicitly left wing Democrat supporting companies.

But it's never about principles, there's always a form of words that can be collected together for the masses....it's about power.

Even so, some of the reactions to Musk are a sight to read as Musk isn't even what you'd say was on the right. I'd call him a spicy centralist with libertarian leanings...he certainly has a love for memes.....But as usual that's enough to get him placed next to that famous Austrian painter of moderate ability.

He's obviously going to reinstate Trump and probably going to reset Twitter for most. I like his determination to open source the algorithm and to end faulty accounts, bots and ensure people are authenticated. All noble intentions.

It may be that social media is a net negative for social cohesion in the world, however I think Musk could at least be trying to create its best, least damaging form....as the genie can't be put back in the bottle.

Edited by Stirlingsays (28 Apr 2022 2.59am)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The New York Times has reported that the Musk deal won't be finished and control passed over for three to six months — so despite what many new Twitter joiners are thinking Musk's ideas aren't actually controlling the site at the moment.

I can only imagine what's going on within their infrastructure management....their moderation teams. Some will want to keep their jobs and will bend with the wind and others will leave or I imagine end up being sacked for whatever reason.

They, no doubt, are going to use the time to cover up and destroy anything that a new broom would recognise as negative.

Musk may see himself as a centralist but it's mainly the progressives...which today is effectively the Democratic party who hate his guts.

The Biden's regime have suddenly discovered....great timing....a desire to work against western oligarchs.....but we know that's only those ones who don't sing from their hymn sheet.

Does Musk really know just how powerful his enemies are? and just how dirty and evil it gets? You know, I think he actually thinks that good intent will see him through.

The next year is going to be fascinating.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I too am on Gab's mailing list so received, in full, the communication referred to above. Even more interesting than Torbas's opinions on the Musk takeover of Twitter, is what was not copied and pasted. You can read it all here, if you wish to:-

[Link]

Torba signs himself thus, "Andrew Torba,CEO, Gab.com, Jesus Christ is King of Kings.

Torba is an aggressive, evangelical Christian who justifies everything he does by his faith. There isn't much "gentle Jesus, friend of the poor and suffering" in Torba's version of Christianity. It's much more Old Testament than New. There is zero tolerance of other faiths, or even other Christian denominations, let alone of non-believers. Much of the part which was not cut and pasted is an interpretation of a Bible story.

I can see why the evangelicals in the USA might like all this guff, but elsewhere? There is more than a hint of "Dominionism" present which I think will quickly turn people away in a secular country like ours is now. They might join for the "free speech" but they don't want to be fed a religious diet at every turn.

Torba also makes, what I believe to be, a huge error in his approach. He believes "free speech" (which everyone wants) means that his platform doesn't moderate content.

This doesn't make sense. In any democracy, no freedoms exist, unless they exist under the law. Musk understands this, and has said so. Twitter will continue to moderate and remove unlawful content. Torba constantly rejects moderation.

Countries have already legislated to ensure social media platforms stay lawful, and others, us included, will follow. That is presented by Torba as "censorship" but it's no such thing. The unfettered spreading of conspiracy theories, posts which could result in violence or other harm to individuals, or calls for insurrection, is illegal, or will become so.

The result of this is that Gab is a niche place where anything goes, wrapped up by in your face religious rhetoric, and attempts to monetorise the package. I only read it to stay abreast of the thinking on the right and have to hold my nose whilst doing so.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Actions, and not just words, are the determinant.

Without active moderation of content, you rely on users to stay within the rules.

Gab is the wild west of social media. A town with a notice on the main street requiring everyone to abide by the law, but without a Sheriff to ensure they do so.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.