I just wish this guy would take the loss and sell twitter and go back to being an uncontroversial tech legend. Mixing with Social media has corrupted every positive thing he has done and maybe will do if he keeps it up at the current pace. People tire of the drama king. If you don't know what I mean.. he said his transgender child is dead to him in a publicly aired interview. That's where this guy is in his personal relationships.
Drama is the only way for him to continue covering up the massive Ponzi that his businesses have evolved into.
Tesla won't last much longer. Their numbers are objectively terrible, and they're puffed up, the truth is even uglier. Boring is losing money fast, X is losing money fast, xAI is losing money fast, NeuraLink is losing a bit slower, but losing. SpaceX is propped up by US govt and Starlink is the only real asset here, and governments around the world won't permit a private company led by a lunatic to have a monopoly on the world's communications, so Elon is really in a VERY BAD NOT GOOD AT ALL situation.
>>I just wish this guy would take the loss and sell twitter and go back to being an uncontroversial tech legend.
Why do you care, he is spending his own money. Isn't it more important that we now know Brazil has no rule of law. A single party overtook all the subsystems in the country and now Brazil is in the company of countries like Iran or North Korea regarding X censorship. Eye opening is also how many people would condemn an entire nation to censorship only to see one guy they don't like hurt.
> Is this a principled defense of free speech or a case of a man treating ostensibly independent companies as divisions of his personal conglomerate?
Musk was happy to block Twitter content for Erdoğan before the 2023 Turkish election,[0][1] and block Ukraine from using it to hit the Russian navy.[2]
You will find Musk's pretend "free-speech absolutism" is highly selective, and only applies to far-right voices. He's repeatedly censored his critics and journalists on his platform.
The court orders for Twitter in Brazil were way more tame and based on judicial procedures than orders that Elon followed from Turkey and other less democratic countries.
There's no visible rhyme or reason why he's fighting the Brazilian courts much harder than orders from other less democratic countries, something else is happening unrelated to free speech or any lip service he pays to.
Twitter is far from a wasteland. Nothing that matters is exclusively on Bluesky, but a lot of it is on Twitter. The "old media" heavily relies on Twitter, too. Anger is a major driver of engagement on any medium, it's only natural that this shows through on Twitter.
Alternative platforms appear to be more civil because they're islands of echo-chambers. The anger is still there, it's just directed at the more abstract out-group, rather than any individuals that are part of the conversation.
Pffft. X is by far the most important social network for people and things that matter. So not your vacation photos on Facebook or some influencer posting semi-nude pics on Instagram. It has only gotten better since Musk made moderation neutral, as opposed to the previous absurdly one-sided suppression of anything that deviates even slightly from ultra-left Liberal Silicon Valley ideology.
Just how important are the ground stations in Brazil? (I don't mean the end user terminals.)
If Starlink will basically continue to work well enough if those are seized, it seems like the obvious next steps are going to be crypto/stablecoin payments and a focus on small form factor terminals like Starlink Mini that can bypass customs.
And then Starlink users get fined or arrested and Starlink Minis get seized. Also how good does it look for an international company to sell as evading customs and imports taxes.
Crypto and stablecoin don't make the physical reality of owning such a device disappear.
This is a path that ends with Starlink being unable to respect the law in other jurisdictions, and getting progressively banned elsewhere, or Musk getting jailed on foreign trips like the Telegram CEO.
There is a reason why legit companies tend to avoid using the same tools and methods as drug cartels.
Barelly related, I was not Twitter user, but since X I come up with full length XXX movies in suggestions. Did it started with X or they were a thing before Elon?
This storyline was a rare case of me supporting Elon, but once again, he goes too far, childishly, for his ego. He is just proving a lot of people i don't particularly like right, that billionaires are supranational powers. Which does support a very marxist view on capitalism (and productivism sadly), that it enable money to create power above political power.
Power is power.. of course a bilionaire or even milionaire is gonna be "more powerful" than some nations.. there are some with < 50M gdp.
But at the end of the day its just about internet. X has every right to say fuck off to some countries its not based in, while countries has the "right" if they decide it to censor some parts of the internet.
Thats not really the point in the end. The point is really "is free speech, including hate speech and disinformation should be right or not in your country"
Its a very hard question that im not sure i have the answer. Someones's hate speech is always someone else's "speaking the truth" but ibknow some cases where censoring made sense.
Sorry I don't get: how is possible to find anybody defending Musk when the Supreme Court of a democracy ruled to exclude X from the country ?
Free speech is a good thing AS LONG AS it respect the country laws. In France, the People decided democratically (through their elected representatives) against some kinds of so-called "free speech" (for example: racism apology). That's OUR choice, on OUR territory (like it or not: rule your own country but not mine). Why should X be allowed to refuse to respect the France laws on the french territory (resp. Europe) ?
And if a Court find that X doesn't respect the country law, why should X be seen as a "free speech" leader and not just as an illegal company ?
For me, Musk attitude is just plain bullying as usual, and I just hope that Brazil will be able to negociate with US to punish him as he deserve for being such an (insert your prefered insult here)
The judge has a history of actual censorship, here's a case that the NYT wrote about, where he got a Brazilian magazine's news article deleted for "fake news" for writing a true article about the official who promoted him, as soon as he got powers to censor without due process or checks and balances.
> To run the investigation, Mr. Toffoli tapped Mr. Moraes, 53, an intense former federal justice minister and constitutional law professor who had joined the court in 2017.
> In his first action, Mr. Moraes ordered a Brazilian magazine, Crusoé, to remove an online article that showed links between Mr. Toffoli and a corruption investigation. Mr. Moraes called it “fake news.”
> Mr. Moraes later lifted the order after legal documents proved the article was accurate.
That article is from 2022 but has a lot of details of overreach by the judge, like search raids on the homes of businessman who just happened to be in a group chat where someone was joking about a coup.
> Free speech is a good thing AS LONG AS it respect the country laws. In France, the People decided democratically (through their elected representatives) against some kinds of so-called "free speech" (for example: racism apology). That's OUR choice, on OUR territory (like it or not: rule your own country but not mine). Why should X be allowed to refuse to respect the France laws on the french territory (resp. Europe) ?
That isn't free speech if it has to abide by the government's laws. That leaves the door open for governments to ban whatever they want and still say their people have free speech because they're free to say whatever isn't banned.
I'm not even saying that is a bad thing, people can choose to run their country however they want. Just don't screw around with definitions and claim speech is free when it isn't.
> I just hope that Brazil will be able to negociate with US to punish him as he deserve for being such an (insert your prefered insult here)
No need to go there. Brazil is sovereign, and it can enforce its laws by itself.
If Starlink doesn't respect the law of the land, just freeze their assets and ask banks doing business in Brazil to stop processing payments to them. If Musk wants to maintain service for free, good for Brazilian people.
As it turns, that's what Brazilian courts did [1].
There are a bunch of countries calling them selves democratic in name but are anything but that in reality. If in France in the future people democratically decide racism apology is fine, you would have no problem with that?
Huh. Maybe you should take your own advice and mind France's business and leave Brazil's and Musk's alone. God knows your country needs it.
Tangential, but I stopped being upset about asinine takes on free speech and government when I realized that the overwhelming majority of them came from provincial and subjugated Brits, Europeans, and Australians. You can see the bed they've made in their own countries, which I think is punishment enough.
This is not a democracy, it's a dictatorship of the judiciary.
X was not banned for racism, it was banned for "fake news". These supreme court judges started censoring "fake news" even before there was any legal basis for it. Then the judges tried to influence the legislative branch in order to get "fake news" laws passed that would legitimize their actions. Google even campaigned against the "fake news" law -- and this judge slapped them with totally arbitrary fines too until they stopped "abusing their economic power".
We the brazilian people have democratically REJECTED the "fake news" laws. They did NOT pass these laws. The representatives we voted for didn't allow it. I witnessed my representatives get rid of this law. And what did the judges do? They rammed the law through via electoral court "resolutions".
This is NOT a democracy. Our representatives don't matter. Only this judge-god-king's whims matter. Whatever he writes on a piece of paper becomes law. His pen makes police go to your home and oppress you, and police doesn't give a shit if the order is unconstitutional or not. This is a dictatorship of the judiciary.
The brazilian constitution spells it out with very simple words anybody can understand:
> Any and all censorship of political, ideological or artistic nature is prohibited
Our constitution does have exceptions for racism in general, just like your country. It does NOT have exceptions for "fake news". Censoring "fake news" is literally unconstitutional. Especially if the speech is of a political nature.
It's frightening how authoritarian the Left has become around the world. Ambiguous laws about'hate' seem poised to protect the world from thought crimes by curtailing basic human rights.
In this context Musk is right and has the power to bring change. He will lose a lot of that power under a Harris presidency that has advertised it plans to continue the crusade against freedom of speech.
Wow, just wow. The gloves are off. I wouldn’t expect anything this naive on HN.
There is a difference between freedom of expression (freedom of opinion) and freedom of speech. The latter contains the former, but is much more than that because freedom of expression stops where hate and discrimination begins.
Yeah, let's start a war with the USA by shooting down their satellites. What could go wrong?
Brazil does not have anti-satellite capabilities anyway. Brazil barely has guided missiles, it barely has rockets. Our space program is such a joke the brazilian military actually published a report detailing how the interference with Starlink is going to impact their operations. Starlink brought more internet and connectivity to the Amazon than the state ever did or ever will.
Brazil should just sponsor their own fediverse nodes. But it's a lot easier to just block something in their national ISP. Complicated long term solutions are not interesting when they're trying to extort Elon for money.
> Complicated long term solutions are not interesting when they're trying to extort Elon for money.
There's no extortion, the fines are simply due to the company not following courts' decisions. The money itself is inconsequential, the fines are too low to be of any importance to the Brazilian government, they just want Elon to follow the law.
Or do you believe a company should have the power to be above the law in a jurisdiction they operate in?
ldbooth|1 year ago
jowea|1 year ago
3cats-in-a-coat|1 year ago
Tesla won't last much longer. Their numbers are objectively terrible, and they're puffed up, the truth is even uglier. Boring is losing money fast, X is losing money fast, xAI is losing money fast, NeuraLink is losing a bit slower, but losing. SpaceX is propped up by US govt and Starlink is the only real asset here, and governments around the world won't permit a private company led by a lunatic to have a monopoly on the world's communications, so Elon is really in a VERY BAD NOT GOOD AT ALL situation.
nec4b|1 year ago
Why do you care, he is spending his own money. Isn't it more important that we now know Brazil has no rule of law. A single party overtook all the subsystems in the country and now Brazil is in the company of countries like Iran or North Korea regarding X censorship. Eye opening is also how many people would condemn an entire nation to censorship only to see one guy they don't like hurt.
cjpearson|1 year ago
throw0101d|1 year ago
Musk was happy to block Twitter content for Erdoğan before the 2023 Turkish election,[0][1] and block Ukraine from using it to hit the Russian navy.[2]
[0] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/05/musk-defends-ena...
[1] https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/05/twitter-musk-censors...
[2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/musk-stopped-ukraine-atta...
fmajid|1 year ago
seydor|1 year ago
Are the judge's (possibly illegal) moves motivated by interpretation of the law or by personal vendetta?
Hard to tell , but i'm glad for less censorship.
r0ckarong|1 year ago
teekert|1 year ago
They blocked the funds of Starlink because of X related business. So why are you saying this?
piva00|1 year ago
There's no visible rhyme or reason why he's fighting the Brazilian courts much harder than orders from other less democratic countries, something else is happening unrelated to free speech or any lip service he pays to.
danw1979|1 year ago
hereme888|1 year ago
simonhorlick|1 year ago
incrudible|1 year ago
Alternative platforms appear to be more civil because they're islands of echo-chambers. The anger is still there, it's just directed at the more abstract out-group, rather than any individuals that are part of the conversation.
rowanG077|1 year ago
Razengan|1 year ago
Melchizedek|1 year ago
flotzam|1 year ago
If Starlink will basically continue to work well enough if those are seized, it seems like the obvious next steps are going to be crypto/stablecoin payments and a focus on small form factor terminals like Starlink Mini that can bypass customs.
Sayrus|1 year ago
Crypto and stablecoin don't make the physical reality of owning such a device disappear.
diegoholiveira|1 year ago
Is used by the military, hospitals and schools on remote places on the amazon rainforest.
pyrale|1 year ago
There is a reason why legit companies tend to avoid using the same tools and methods as drug cartels.
zo1|1 year ago
@Elon: Start putting your actual servers up in order next.
batushka5|1 year ago
ripjaygn|1 year ago
Before that videos could only be max 140 seconds long. Now the limit is 2 hours.
josefritzishere|1 year ago
davidguetta|1 year ago
monkfish328|1 year ago
orwin|1 year ago
davidguetta|1 year ago
Power is power.. of course a bilionaire or even milionaire is gonna be "more powerful" than some nations.. there are some with < 50M gdp.
But at the end of the day its just about internet. X has every right to say fuck off to some countries its not based in, while countries has the "right" if they decide it to censor some parts of the internet.
Thats not really the point in the end. The point is really "is free speech, including hate speech and disinformation should be right or not in your country"
Its a very hard question that im not sure i have the answer. Someones's hate speech is always someone else's "speaking the truth" but ibknow some cases where censoring made sense.
mulmen|1 year ago
malermeister|1 year ago
mrmlz|1 year ago
olivierduval|1 year ago
Free speech is a good thing AS LONG AS it respect the country laws. In France, the People decided democratically (through their elected representatives) against some kinds of so-called "free speech" (for example: racism apology). That's OUR choice, on OUR territory (like it or not: rule your own country but not mine). Why should X be allowed to refuse to respect the France laws on the french territory (resp. Europe) ?
And if a Court find that X doesn't respect the country law, why should X be seen as a "free speech" leader and not just as an illegal company ?
For me, Musk attitude is just plain bullying as usual, and I just hope that Brazil will be able to negociate with US to punish him as he deserve for being such an (insert your prefered insult here)
ivewonyoung|1 year ago
> To run the investigation, Mr. Toffoli tapped Mr. Moraes, 53, an intense former federal justice minister and constitutional law professor who had joined the court in 2017. > In his first action, Mr. Moraes ordered a Brazilian magazine, Crusoé, to remove an online article that showed links between Mr. Toffoli and a corruption investigation. Mr. Moraes called it “fake news.”
> Mr. Moraes later lifted the order after legal documents proved the article was accurate.
https://archive.is/plQFT
That article is from 2022 but has a lot of details of overreach by the judge, like search raids on the homes of businessman who just happened to be in a group chat where someone was joking about a coup.
_heimdall|1 year ago
That isn't free speech if it has to abide by the government's laws. That leaves the door open for governments to ban whatever they want and still say their people have free speech because they're free to say whatever isn't banned.
I'm not even saying that is a bad thing, people can choose to run their country however they want. Just don't screw around with definitions and claim speech is free when it isn't.
true_religion|1 year ago
Personally, I don’t think countries should get international control over satellites that they didn’t launch or operate.
pyrale|1 year ago
No need to go there. Brazil is sovereign, and it can enforce its laws by itself.
If Starlink doesn't respect the law of the land, just freeze their assets and ask banks doing business in Brazil to stop processing payments to them. If Musk wants to maintain service for free, good for Brazilian people.
As it turns, that's what Brazilian courts did [1].
[1]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2024/08/30/musk-esca...
hereme888|1 year ago
nec4b|1 year ago
smitty1e|1 year ago
Your hint that Brazil have the USG give Elon Musk the Pavel Durov treatment is chilling, indeed.
I guess after HN is shut down, a Martin Niemöller moment might find you. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
nataliste|1 year ago
Tangential, but I stopped being upset about asinine takes on free speech and government when I realized that the overwhelming majority of them came from provincial and subjugated Brits, Europeans, and Australians. You can see the bed they've made in their own countries, which I think is punishment enough.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
mcosta|1 year ago
[deleted]
TMWNN|1 year ago
I am not in favor of any government fining people thousands of US dollars a day for the thoughtcrime of using a VPN to access X from within Brazil.
(I'm pretty sure that mods are hiding the VPN-ban news from /r/news and /r/worldnews, because it would damage the ongoing anti-Musk two-minute hates.)
matheusmoreira|1 year ago
This is not a democracy, it's a dictatorship of the judiciary.
X was not banned for racism, it was banned for "fake news". These supreme court judges started censoring "fake news" even before there was any legal basis for it. Then the judges tried to influence the legislative branch in order to get "fake news" laws passed that would legitimize their actions. Google even campaigned against the "fake news" law -- and this judge slapped them with totally arbitrary fines too until they stopped "abusing their economic power".
We the brazilian people have democratically REJECTED the "fake news" laws. They did NOT pass these laws. The representatives we voted for didn't allow it. I witnessed my representatives get rid of this law. And what did the judges do? They rammed the law through via electoral court "resolutions".
This is NOT a democracy. Our representatives don't matter. Only this judge-god-king's whims matter. Whatever he writes on a piece of paper becomes law. His pen makes police go to your home and oppress you, and police doesn't give a shit if the order is unconstitutional or not. This is a dictatorship of the judiciary.
The brazilian constitution spells it out with very simple words anybody can understand:
> Any and all censorship of political, ideological or artistic nature is prohibited
Our constitution does have exceptions for racism in general, just like your country. It does NOT have exceptions for "fake news". Censoring "fake news" is literally unconstitutional. Especially if the speech is of a political nature.
TibbityFlanders|1 year ago
In this context Musk is right and has the power to bring change. He will lose a lot of that power under a Harris presidency that has advertised it plans to continue the crusade against freedom of speech.
sebazzz|1 year ago
There is a difference between freedom of expression (freedom of opinion) and freedom of speech. The latter contains the former, but is much more than that because freedom of expression stops where hate and discrimination begins.
WhereIsTheTruth|1 year ago
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/01/08/brazil-...
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1240540.shtml
You'd want the white house to do the same if China would want to do something similar with, let's say, TikTok ;)
hereme888|1 year ago
I'm hoping for a different outcome and the world turns in a better direction than forcing "Democrats" to vote for an un-nominated candidate.
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
malermeister|1 year ago
[deleted]
redog|1 year ago
matheusmoreira|1 year ago
Brazil does not have anti-satellite capabilities anyway. Brazil barely has guided missiles, it barely has rockets. Our space program is such a joke the brazilian military actually published a report detailing how the interference with Starlink is going to impact their operations. Starlink brought more internet and connectivity to the Amazon than the state ever did or ever will.
fmajid|1 year ago
The judge can certainly issue an Interpol Red Notice for Musk, which would cramp his jet-setting lifestyle.
INTPenis|1 year ago
piva00|1 year ago
There's no extortion, the fines are simply due to the company not following courts' decisions. The money itself is inconsequential, the fines are too low to be of any importance to the Brazilian government, they just want Elon to follow the law.
Or do you believe a company should have the power to be above the law in a jurisdiction they operate in?