[zenron]

Being a free speech absolutist has nothing to do with consequences from invoking your free speech. Everyone wanting free speech despite what type of speech that they legally allow is the price we pay to have it. Invoking it and using ignorant, racist or hatefull language doesn't mean you won't pay a social price for it. It just means we won't throw you in jail using the state for it. But you may just lose your jobs. Thems' the breaks.

[felipesoc]

Exactly, it means we won't throw you in jail using the state. But Musk argues otherwise, that Twitter must let people use their platform to say whatever they want. And at the same time, people working for him cannot say whatever they want about his company.

[mlindner]

You're twisting things a bit. He views Twitter as a virtual extension of the real life town square. Namely that the government/Twitter can't remove you from that real/virtual town square for what you say.

SpaceX isn't, nor will it ever be, a town square so the rules don't extend there. (Nor do they extend to Twitter the corporation itself.)

[meatsauce]

This is highly deceptive. Musk is on record saying that for a town square, you should be able to say whatever you want so long as it is within the letter of the law. Which means, gone will be the days of getting perma-banned for offending some woke crybaby.

Musk's companies are not town squares. They are private entities and employees can be fired for insubordination, harassment, or abuse of company resources.

[ss108]

"It just means we won't throw you in jail using the state for it. But you may just lose your jobs. Thems' the breaks."

This is a misrepresentation of the current "debate" taking place regarding free speech, a debate we have frequently on Hacker News. Nobody is threatened with jail for saying anything in the US, so if that was the primary bone of contention, the debate wouldn't exist. It's more about cancel culture, etc.