Hacker News Reader

> Ha! Yes, that should be the case, but new supreme leader wants to deregulate.

Isn't he looking to strip the YouTubes of the world of their 230 protections?

Elon is a major beneficiary of Section 230. That’s not going away.

Elon Musk was willing to spend 44 billion dollars just to burn down a social media platform for being too "woke." I don't think he cares, and I don't think Trump cares.

Elon didn’t burn down Twitter. It still has 100m+ users. He turned it into a politically far right echo chamber, gas lighting its users about “free speech absolutism,” and then outright banning, demoting, or drowning out commentary he doesn’t agree with.

Unless you meant “burn down” in the sense of “turned it into the ashes of a trash fire…” but it was always a trash fire. People still go for it, and advertising still happens there.

Twitter is hemorrhaging users and advertisers and is worth a fraction of what it was when Elon let the sink in. It used to be a primary source for media, politics and culture, now it's just a Nazi bar.

I'd consider that burning the platform down, but we may just disagree on semantics.

Ok. I may just be unaware of the actual numbers. “The advertisers came back, and more liberal users were leaving, but businesses still found it valuable” was sort of my last understanding.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com