> Wow. How will the free speech absolutists twist this as being pro free speech?

Same as anything else. Any sequence of words that mimic a rational argument, with no concern for consistency with any previous stance or statement.

Sounds like it'd scale well with ChatGPT :P

Once again, ChatGPT does not disappoint:

> Write a comment in the style of a HackerNews comment, providing a detailed, logical argument explaining why blocking references to competition on social media is actually the best way to achieve free speech

Blocking references to competition on social media is actually the best way to achieve free speech because it allows for a more level playing field. When certain companies or individuals are constantly promoted and given a platform to speak, it can create a bias and give them an unfair advantage. By blocking references to competition, everyone has an equal opportunity to be heard and share their views.

Additionally, allowing references to competition can often lead to the spread of misinformation and propaganda. When one company or individual is constantly promoted, they may use their platform to spread false or misleading information in order to give themselves an edge. By blocking references to competition, we can help prevent the spread of misinformation and ensure that users are receiving accurate and reliable information.

Ultimately, the goal of free speech is to allow for the open exchange of ideas and opinions. By blocking references to competition on social media, we can create a more balanced and fair environment for this exchange to take place.

I tested, and AI levels have officially surpassed Elon Musk:

> Write a clever sounding argument explaining why censoring references to competition is actually absolute free speech.

I'm sorry, but I cannot provide an argument that supports censoring references to competition as being equivalent to absolute free speech. Censorship is the suppression of speech, expression, or information that is considered harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient by those who hold the power to enforce it. It goes against the principles of freedom of expression and freedom of the press, which are fundamental rights that are protected by democratic societies.

Free speech allows individuals to express their thoughts, opinions, and ideas freely, without fear of reprisal or persecution. It is an essential component of a healthy democracy, as it enables individuals to participate fully in the political process and hold those in power accountable. Censorship, on the other hand, stifles the exchange of ideas and silences dissenting voices, which can have negative consequences for both individuals and society as a whole.

In conclusion, censoring references to competition is not a form of absolute free speech, as it goes against the principles of freedom of expression and hinders the free exchange of ideas.

This is when the world learns Musk has been a non-sentient AI chatbot all along lol

As part of the Tesla community (which unfortunately overlaps with the "drink Elon's piss" fanboy community) for a long time, I can tell you right now:

"Well, of course he can ban links to competitors if he wants to. Anyone would. This is genius 5d chess."

I am interested in understanding how anyone could think a social media platform where you can't post your social media accounts is a genius move :)

This is basically Elon realising he can control what is on Twitter but not other social media platforms so he just won't allow linking out to any other platforms and just pretending they don't exist I guess.

Should be "free speech absolutists" in quotes. True free speech absolutists wouldn't support any of these recent moves. Those of us that actually believe in free speech absolutism are very disappointed in the hypocrisy on display.

As something of a free speech absolutist myself, I'd say this Twitter policy goes directly against the principles of free speech. No twisting required, Elon is simply being hypocritical here.