252
Elon Musk will sue Australia for ordering X to remove a hateful post by an anti-trans activist
(www.lgbtqnation.com)
this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2024
252 points (95.0% liked)
Enough Musk Spam
2089 readers
257 users here now
For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.
No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.
Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.
Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.
Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not trivializing the situation, and you're not saying anything new. Let's use other examples.
Google can't use "Gmail" in Germany. Why haven't they sued Germany into forcing them to let them use Gmail instead of GoogleMail?
And remember when Musk threatened to remove Twitter from Europe because of a change in the law? Why didn't he sue in The Hague?
All bark and no bite.
As much as you say the opposite, Australia will "lol no" out of with this one.
you know just because you have a few cases where companies didn't bother doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all. thats a logical fallacy where just because you have examples of one side doesn't mean the opposite isn't true at all. go google companies suing countries and you'll see that companies sue countries and their regulators all the time. seriously.. the term "companies suing countries" yields a lot of articles about companies suing countries over antitrust laws... companies suing countries over environmental laws, etc. companies are allowed to challenge laws in court and when they do, it's taken seriously by legitimate governments...
Now you're just doing mental gymnastics. Australia is taking the issue seriously. It deliberated on the issue and determined that that Twitter post is cancer, so it must be removed. Twitter can sue 200 times if they want to, and Australia will "lol no" every time.
me telling you that you're using logical fallacies to make a point is me telling you that you're the one doing mental gymnastics here. I like how you said that they deliberated bc that is already saying they're doing more than just "lol no" and exactly the point I'm trying to make here. they do more than just say "lol no". they deliberate and it takes time and tax payer dollars to do that.
Nah, brah. Australia has more power than Twitter. The cost is negligible to them. They can "lol no" as many times as it wants, even ban it if it becomes a little shit like its CEO.
This conversation is getting repetitive. Do you have anything else to discuss? Did you see the eclipse? How did you like it?
I honestly think we are just picking at each other at this point, ya? I think we both are being hyperbolic at this point. like yeah it's "lol no" basically but obviously not that simple, right? I can agree with that.
I was nowhere close to totality, so I didn't get much of it but it was still sick that it happened. did you get to see any of it?
Unfortunately not directly. I wasn't anywhere close to its path. But I did see a live streaming and it was cool.
I saw an eclipse years ago with my own eyes, and it was surreal!
Still, very cool that you got to see part of it!