@mmasnick No offense, but this is kind of ironic in an article about Twitter - a site owned by a person who is actively sympathizing with the Russian disinformation campaign the article is talking about.
I know that this is a counter-productive question, but I do really sometimes wonder what you actually think should happen in a case like this - when a website is actively and willfully doing social harm. Because that marketplace of ideas is clearly failing.
@Merovius is it really failing? Advertising is down 60% The site has lost somewhere around 50 million users. It seems like the marketplace is rejecting his approach. It may not be as fast as you like but it's working a lot better than thinking the gov't should come in and decide what speech is allowed.
@mmasnick It has been failing since before Musk took over. The erosion of democracy in large parts of the world - hurried along by the profit-motive of large corporations - is a failure of the marketplace of ideas, yes.
@Merovius I just fundamentally disagree. If I were a dictator would I do things differently? Yes. But that does not mean I think we should have dictators to stop the stuff I disagree with.
@mmasnick I agree. So your answer is "cross your fingers and hope that companies do the right thing and that the (financial) market is able to deal with it"?
@Merovius no. and, no offense, but I'm really fucking sick of people suggesting that because I say the gov't shouldn't censor, that it means "do nothing at all." I'm out here fucking fighting all the time to stop terrible shit happening, but using my voice, convincing others, helping researchers, helping spread news of what works to counter disinfo, etc. etc. etc.
That's a hell of a lot more than "cross your fingers."
@mmasnick It's fine to be annoyed. I mentioned that I know it's an annoying question and I do apologize.
I just don't think I've ever seen you embrace pretty much any form of regulation. And I don't think an unregulated market place of ideas works any better than an unregulated economy.
And the division and strive - let's call it "idea inefficiencies" - it creates have pretty dire consequences. Preventing us from acting on climate change is another great example.
@Merovius why do you think "embracing regulation" is the only way to deal with these issues? That's my frustration. The near total capitulation that the only way these issues are solved is through gov't censorship.
@mmasnick You seem to be equating "regulation" (any regulation) with censorship here.
And the reason I think regulation is necessary is that we know - historically - that propaganda works. Fascism as a mass-ideology is effective. And we know - historically - that capitalists are very happy to go along with it and even prop it up.
And preventing those kinds of harms and preserving democracy is part of what government is for.
@Merovius@mmasnick Masnick likes to act like he’s oh-so above it all, but he’s not. He’s just another technolibertarian Internet dudebro with connections that will resort to insults when he can. He called you an idiot on the not-so-secret club that is the Techdirt Insider Discord.
@Ash_Greytree@mmasnick Nobody likes a tattletale. As I said, I understand that my question is frustrating and ultimately I'm a stranger on the internet, he can vent his frustration however he likes.
@Merovius@Ash_Greytree uhhhh... me talking about battling idiots was not, in ANY way in reference to @Merovius questions to me, which I believe were in good faith. John was referring to an argument I got into on Bluesky, and it was idiots there that I was referring to.
@Merovius@Ash_Greytree I will note that my frustration in responding here was that the question came after I'd spent hours being told nonsense by a small group of very foolish people on Bluesky. But, I did not see @Merovius questions as problematic. IT was a good faith request for clarification, which is fine. I was just exhausted. But I'm sorry for venting my frustration in response to you either way.
Add comment