upvote

points

by pixel_popping3 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby spiderfarmer3 hours ago|
[-]
Musk partied with Epstein.
reply
upvoteby pixel_popping2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby tclancy2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
What’s the correlation between people defending Musk, Twitter and kiddie diddlers?
reply
upvoteby pixel_popping1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I don't know either, I don't see the correlation with X and Musk either, as if he is the one developing the platform and not thousand of workers and leaders. What does the CEO of a platform has to do with what people post on it? The CEO of HN is responsible for what you just posted?

Kinda funny how people are selective about it, when you land on a website, you check who is in charge of it and for each CEO change you redo a decision? When you host your Postgres in the cloud, I hope you check as well who is in charge of Railway or Supabase, who knows? :/

reply
upvoteby spiderfarmer58 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
There's only thing I find sadder than untouchable billionaires that never see any consequences for their actions: the people who think they need to stick up for them.

> What does the CEO of a platform has to do with what people post on it?

That CEO is actively promoting political viewpoints (via his account, his platform and his AI model) that are detrimental to my country and the way I want to live my life.

> When you land on a website, you check who is in charge of it and for each CEO change you redo a decision?

No. But if the CEO is very publicly a first-class a-hole, chances are I'll hear about it and I'll actively avoid doing business with them. That goes for the car dealership in my village, as well as the websites I interact with.

reply
upvoteby pixel_popping43 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
I'm not from the US so I don't really care, X is an international platform and almost all the content I see isn't US related (which kinda make me think that people should just set their account from outside of the US to just avoid this?), but from your point of view, it seems more of a disagreement of beliefs, wouldn't this reasoning apply for your beliefs as well? If the CEO of a certain platform was agreeing with your beliefs but 50% of the population don't, you are practically saying that people disagreering should boycott said platform, but isn't that how you just end discourse between people and create an echo-chamber?
reply