X accused of taking payments from terrorists
bbc.com
Elon Musk's X, formerly Twitter, granted subscription perks to designated terrorist groups and others barred from operating in the US, according to campaigners.
Elon Musk's X, formerly Twitter, granted subscription perks to designated terrorist groups and others barred from operating in the US, according to campaigners.
Cancel this idiot's government contracts and prosecute him.
Nationalize Starlink while you're at it.
Nationalize all of his assets and deport his ass back to South Africa
Best idea ive heard all year
Can you deport citizens?
According to the leader of the conservatives, you can.
Hang on, we're getting our ideas from that asshole now?
It's called "a taste of their own medicine"
That is what the good guys say in movies.
Starlink is not feeseable long term, let Musk keep that POS
I'm not so sure. It solves a lot of issues, though they don't effect the vast majority of us. It'd be great as a nationally operated utility for military purposes to more easily provide internet access and communication to navy vassels as well as operations near the poles. It's also useful for very remote areas or mobile living. As a company operated for profit, sure I doubt it'll survive if militaries don't trust it, which I wouldn't. As a utility operated for the sake of the utility it provides, it's useful.
Twitter is burning money and struggling with getting advertisers, and "subscribers" are barely keeping them afloat. Of course they need to accept money where ever it comes from. Why is this a surprise?
Unfortunately, whether your business is failing or not, it still has to follow applicable laws.
That's how a subscription works, people pay money for benefits. Not surprised that X isn't looking into paying accounts since they are short staffed (AFAIK) and low on money. No surprise at all, clickbait title here.
Just because they might not have the capabilities to due this sort of dilligence, doesnt mean it wouldnt be news.
If they do business with entities that are under US sanctions, they are breaking the paw and need to face consequences.
That they self inflicted their inability to abide by the law does not excuse it. Instead it makes it worse.
Blue checks can also receive payment based on engagement from other blue checks, though. Doesn't seem to be implied in the article that this happened, but it's a consideration.
Taking money from Israel, i see? /S
Why the /s?
So they aren't a terrorist government? Because they do seem to like to terrorise innocent civilians
They are not terrorists, just utter garbage and waste of organic matter. We should recycle them in factories or something before they start bombing other countries in the name of their delusions. 🧐🧐🧐 /S
Were they taking money from the CIA?
SpaceX and Tesla both got US government grants, why is no one talkibg bout that group of terrorists?
I never even think about taking money from terrorists as a problem. Guess most social media organizations aren't so hard up for cash or short staffed.
And if I understood correctly, they only take away the blue checkmark, and don't close the accounts?
Well, as long as they're taking money away from the terrorists. /s
Lemmy isn't much better.
Care to elaborate on that?
I'm an instance admin, and I haven't taken money from anyone to fund my stack (let alone terrorists).
Most Lemmy instances are run by volunteers, many as personal projects. The few big instances typically accept donations and often provide financial summaries (Beehaw definitely does, and I think LW does something similar?)
Sure. The swarm of terrorist sympathizers is well known on these pages. Which is fine, but you can't respond to them without a mod making up an excuse to ban you from a community. You either conform to their thinking or get the hook. They are a powerful lobby. Not the same in other chat boards. Does money change hands? Don't know, but it's as if it does. If you haven't taken money, perhaps some is owed to you.
From the modlog, it shows that you recently posted comments containing ethnic slurs and were just being completely uncivil in the other (the original comments are all visible in the modlog). Further back, several comments were removed for being hostile. It was only after all that you got a 3 day ban which is basically a slap on the wrist.
That's hardly "conform or get the hook".
ooof.
I'll gladly compare past writings and discuss them. But, understand that a mod has to say something to justify their position and they won't move off that no matter how ridicules it seems. In this case I referred to Jihad Janes. There is nothing ethnic about that and it's certainly not a slur. Jihad is a spiritual struggle. Anyway, it was enough for the mod.
That's factually not true. A mod can ban you because they don't like creeks (as in your name) and it would be perfectly valid. Not saying i agree with it, just that they can without having to justify themselves.
Yeah whatever. Keep blowing smoke up my skirt, All Great and Powerful Oz
Make your own community, with blackjack and hookers if you want? If the instance doesn't let you, make it somewhere else or make your own instance. That's the beauty of the fediverse.
Generally, you need to be really bad to get de-federated from most instances.
I'll keep that kind advice in mind
Who exactly is "They?"
>The swarm of terrorist sympathizers is well known on these pages.
you're making this up.
The .ml admins are problematic afaik
Move then?