Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

It does indeed look like BlueSky overtly celebrating a nation-state banning Twitter, their competitor.

Mike Masnick is on our board and wrote some commentary on this: https://www.techdirt.com/2024/08/30/brazil-bans-extwitter-in...

I do have to ask where the equivalent free-speech outrage is that Musk is overtly campaigning for a political party via X.

Musk, like anyone else, has a right to endorse whoever he wants. Unless there's evidence that he's mass censoring or banning Democrats, I don't really see why there'd be any outrage. No one certainly seems to care when Silicon Valley big wigs donate to the other side.

Seems like even Masnick agrees, albeit begrudgingly, that this judge is an authoritarian. Where I cannot agree with Masnick is the implication that Musk and this man are somehow both equally wrong.

A government official, no less a judge, should be held to a far higher standard as his actions impact hundreds of millions of people. And as we can see by his unprecedented order banning VPNs, he clearly lacks the circumspection and self-reflection necessary to hold such an important office.

As a libertarian, how am I supposed to believe in the authenticity and neutrality of the network that Musk is operating when he openly supports a specific political ideology with his public actions? He shows no dedication to neutrality in his statements, so why should I believe he shows it with his decisions?

If the measure of a high standard is the number of people impacted, how many people would you say are affected by Musk, or the other private owners of social networks?

You're a libertarian, but you have issues with someone holding their own political opinions. Interesting combination.