Chances for the fediverse? Elon Musk takes hit as Europeans ditch X in droves
cross-posted from: https://europe.pub/post/372863
cross-posted from: https://metawire.eu/post/61363
The right-wing billionaire’s platform has recently lost about 10 percent of its European user base.
https://www.politico.eu/article/elon-musk-x-europe-social-media-twitter-takes-hit/Open linkView original on europe.pub859
Comments155
It's a good start but we gotta pump those numbers up.
The rest are bots and Russian troll farms.
remember 80% of instagram is bots according to a study reported by german media.
so X id even say it could be more giving the vast hatred increase and content change over the last years. so basically they lost 90%
EDIT/additional bit: funk's german post referenced this Imperva Bad Bot Report 2024
It's not just X; American social media has been gradually turning into such a shit show for the last 10 years: censorship, misinformation, consensus manufacture and creeping enshitification. I jumped ship to the fediverse and never looked back!
Let me guess, they're moving to Bluesky?
I tried moving to Mastadon first a few years ago and it was a pretty shit experience, Bluesky however has stuck in my app rotation pretty well.
Because Bluesky is centralised. You went from one serial killer's house to another. You don't know which serial killer owns your new house, but you're hoping they'll be nicer than the previous one. But at least their house is nearly as nice as the old serial killer's house.
Dunno why you're being down voted so hard. Didn't Bluesky literally cede to Turkish demands of censorship or some shit?
Yep. That's exactly why I'm saying it's centralised.
You say that like that isn't exactly what the majority of people want. When I first left Reddit, I was trying to explain Lemmy and federated services to some friends and one of them immediately replied with "why would you want that?" And this was from a guy who owned and operated his own TeamSpeak server just for his friends to use.
The average person wants a service that's easy to use first and foremost, and that is always going to be easier to do with a big centralized one owned and operated by a large company. They just want to be able to make an account and connect with friends and content. They don't care about things like privacy until it actively harms them.
I'm not saying it "like" anything. I'm stating that they are not escaping anything but moving from problem to future problem.
Isn't email easy to use? Do people know that it's federated? Probably not, but it's easy to understand because they have been exposed to it for so long that it's natural to them without knowing how it works. Why do you assume the same cannot happen for the fediverse? It's basically social media built on top of email.
The major mistake people make is trying to explain technical stuff to people who don't give a fuck. "Look at your email account, it's YOURNAME@WEBSITE, well, that's the same for lemmy and mastodon, pick a website you like, create an account, and that's it". Everyone knows what a website is, everyone knows what email is, everyone knows (but probably hasn't realised) that they can send emails to SOMEBODYELSE@OTHERWEBSITE, that's it.
I mean, I don't even think it's a matter of privacy, and moreso a matter of spreading out the amount of influence that one person can have as a whole on a public platform. If it's more spread out, there is less direct control that billionaires and corpos will have on these platforms that have basically become very important in terms of public discourse and public opinion.
General advice regarding open source: even if you tried something out years ago and didn't like it, it may be well worth giving it another shot. Open source projects often need some time to mature and take their time to improve, but only get better over time.
Which is incidentally the opposite of proprietary products, where if you give it another go in a few years it either doesn't exist or is enshittified.
Unfortunately until they implement a For you algorithm across all instances and abandoned their archaic hashtag following system I will not be re-attempting
Do you need someone holding your hand while you cross the street too?
That's were the marketing dollars are
Ayyy, gotta have that monaaaay!
Or meta because its better? Like getting run over by a small car instead of a bus.
Ewww people actually use Threads? Last time I saw it, it was like LinkedIn 2.0 filled with sigma grindset "chase that bag" crap.
I'm.on Lemmy and mastodon. Anything else is pure sarcasm. I sarcastically browse for TV's on Amazon. But will I buy? No. All have spyware on them, so no. I wouldn't touch meta with a 300ft pole.
This is not a particularly relevant comment, but you reminded me of when I was a kid and a friend had a TV on a stand opposite her bunk-bed. She didn't have a remote control, but she did have a long stick, and she was amazing at pressing the buttons from like 2m away. Proper life skill.
In my day you had to turn the knob. I made a geared motor adapter to change the channel remotely. DIY when I was 10.
Threads sucks compared to bsky don't know what you're talking about there. Bluesky has way more features and posting quality.
Unironically yes sadly :(
It is humanities responsibility to make the rest of this man’s life miserable
Don't go to BlueSky !!! They're not better than X. They obey to the same leaders... MONEY, GREED, AND POWER. A few weeks ago they restricted 72 Turkish protesters the access to their BlueSky accounts on simple request of the Turkish Government. So, BlueSky cannot be trusted they will secure the accounts of their customers. If Trump would ask BlueSky to block all accounts of members who are against him, they'll do it right away.
https://www.turkishminute.com/2025/04/17/bluesky-restrict-access-72-account-turk-amid-government-pressure7/
Which accessibility standards does Mastodon break?
3 is a feature to me. The "algorithms" seem to create bubbles, and I want to decide myself.
and bluesky doesn’t have a default algorithm either, but allows you to subscribe to algorithms created by other people
being able to choose how the information is presented is the way
That seems like a good way, to give the user the option. In your opinion, are these algorithms transparent enough to understand or even verify for regular users?
yes and no… essentially they’re http services that people run, so they can either be closed or FOSS… i could see a future where there’s like those 1-click “run on ” on github pages and you can audit the code if you want, and self host
they call them “feeds” if you’re interested in going deep
Some people want to make social media account to browse illustration or photography.
Unfortunately, that's not doable on fediverse. You follow anyone, and suddenly your feed filled with content that you are not interested in. Example: your favourite artist also post a lot of game screenshoot, but you're not interested in the games. You just want to see the illustration.
You can follow hashtags and also block them.
Not everything is under hashtag. Most of artist I follow never put hashtag. Hashtag also not useful in multilanguage situation, where a hashtag can mean different think between communities and languages.
The same is true for Bsky but people don't complain about it there. It asks you what server you want when you sign up, etc., which is what people complain about in the Mastodon journey.
Most people aren't on locked servers. By which, I mean the majority of mastodon users are on the .social instance which is the default when you sign up on the official app/site and is open to anyone.
Not an accessibility issue.
Are we sure that the people that complains about "what's an instance?" don't have an agenda?
I'm pretty sure Mastodon is made of algorithms, mate
This is exactly the dismissive attitude that has shaped Mastodon development, and why it will never have broad appeal to replace any traditional social media.
So, you don't know what accessibility standards are. You're just using a term, "accessibility", to mean "the way that I want it to work".
and you’re just using the term accessibility to mean a11y… the word accessibility is far broader than simply accessibility standards for people with disabilities
BlueSky may not be ideal, but anything is better than X.
X is just a machine for turning billionaire cash into political domination.
bluesky is just early twitter, and it wont stay that way for long. they've already removed people from there that the Turkish govt doesn't like and there is nothing at all stopping some billionaire like musk from swooping in and buying it all up.
So "you don't have to eat shit. Only drink piss"?
I mean that's a pretty easy choice for me
What's the quality like of the people who are still on Twitter in 2025? Does the fediverse want them? (These are real questions, I have no idea if there's still any decent people on Twitter.)
Every massive influx from Twitter has brought a deluge of people I want nothing to do with in any way shape or form, and a small sprinkling of cool ones. Fortunately like 4/5ths of the crappy ones leave again, but that other 1/5th is a big number when you're talking an influx of hundreds of thousands.
ik some good people that are still there because some of their friends are.
For most people it's unfortunately just "is it like Twitter" - both in terms of accessibility and algorithmic content suggestion.
I think a sad part of this is due to people wanting that vapid dopamagic response the algorithm provides.
Is it bad for us? Yes.
But addicts are going to addict 🫤
I know lots of people who made a fediverse account easy enough, but just end up back on the algorithm platforms as there's no effort required for discovery.
For the longest time there just wasn't enough activity so you'd get bored and stop checking back. There's enough people now that this isn't an issue anymore.
Except for the fact that most people dont like jumping through multiple hoops to register an account / need to do research beforehand to do it.
What is instance? There are two buttons - sign up for mastodon or choose another instance, I just want to register etc etc.
People dont care for decentralization, they want to sign up and share a link.
Cool. Doesn't change the fact that for a regular joe, "sign up" is what they want to click and then share a link or follow some guy. Not do research on what platform to join, what instance, what's an instance, what happens if you join a wrong one. The fediverse is a gimmick that most people don't need.
Loves this fact. Fify
You said multiple, so name three hoops
I already said them down the chain. Also I am not your monkey to be doing tricks for you.
Great point monkey
personally i prefer bluesky just because the interface is more natural to me (and it's just easier - but also because aew twitter is there and there's more fandoms over on it) but i wish more people would embrace bridgyfed so that we don't have to choose.
Have you tried using elk.zone? It mimics Twitter’s interface and has some great additional features (like zen mode)
oh i do like elk.zone and i do use fediverse, i just find myself more active on bsky just because i follow lots more. i have accounts on both and share on both for different reasons.
Abandon anything this Nazi touches.
I forgot that people are still using Twitter. WTF!?
They are not - he X/cancelled it.:-P
What about his children that hate him but are still his children?
Remove the word "out" and that's how I initially read this and went D:
Can you imagine getting pumped by musk? 🤮
D:
Just a reminder that politico is owned by the Axel Springer group which is a real force of bad for Germany and Europe. Their media campaigns often try to push the public opinion in a right wing conservative direction.
Their biggest shareholder (35%) is KKR (an American global private-equity and investment company) that use the might of the media group to sway the public opinion against climate friendly actions/policies.
Thanks for that, I will be making sure to avoid them.
Small chances for now, but let's keep growing small communities here. People need to get tired of Instagram and centralized algorithms to switch to fediverse
I try to convince people to do “+1”. Like, keep X/insta/reddit or whatever, but every time you feel you have something to post, do the same at mastodon/pixelfed/lemmy. Those platforms are nothing without the network effects, and the network effects will diminish the more people do this.
I'd love it if the fediverse could have its own algoithms as long as theyre open sourced and made ethically, like they shouldn't mess with peoples mental health or cause social media addictions
You are the algorithm. It's like going out decades ago. You didn't have an app to tell you which restaurant, bar or pub was good. You had to go and see it for yourself. Here is the same. You see people and you decide if it's good enough to follow them. The same with communities.
A lot of our biggest communities still have like two mods taking care of everything and are prone to cherry picking. It‘s the same old forum structures where the internet bubble effect is just as strong if not stronger than on larger, already problematic platforms. Some of the things I‘ve seen and experienced lately bring back memories from those internet forum days. Good ones but also the worst ones. And I have to admit it makes me doubt the Fediverse is actually scalable. There‘s just a lack of accountability in the end.
Which is not to say a federalized platform isn‘t an alternative to giant corporations. Those have their own problems and fair share of fuck ups. But I think I‘m already starting to see the limits of the Fediverse. At least in it‘s current stage.
The fediverse is much more than just lemmy. That being said i also disagree for lemmy. Drama between mods and communities was a regular thing on reddit. Still reddit managed to grow quite big before the bots took over. And companies are in no way more accountable to the users. Look at what happened with twitter under Musk. The only realistic choice you have as a normal user is to leave. And in the fediverse leaving a shitty instance still allows you to connect with all the other content from a different instance.
The fediverse is about options. If you don't like how someone else runs their platform or community you can create your own. It's awesome because you don't get locked into one platform. And in the future I think we will see more big companies and organisations running their own stuff. But I agree that at the moment it is not what "normal people" are looking for and it will take quite some time until it develops. But to be fair the same was the case for reddit.
I guess there is a hope that if more people join the Fediverse existing instances and communities won‘t just become more bloated but people create their own alternatives. However I have to say that I have no interest in running one myself. I‘m mostly here to discuss things that pique my interest. Running a community just isn‘t what I‘m here for and I‘m afraid too many people are just like me in that regard and we‘ll create an environment that‘s all too similar to Reddit.
I also don‘t think it‘s good for the platform when people leave a community with a grudge to create a competition „with blackjack and hookers“ style. I want people to come and just create communities because they want to. That‘s where I see a future for the Fediverse.
But I also wouldn‘t want to subscribe to 5 communities about the exact same topic because that would just spam my feed with the same threads probably. However I would actually like to hop between them easily so I don‘t stick around the same few people or have to abandon one for another. A lot would have to change about the way we interact with the platform (UI) and how it‘s connected for this to work though. I‘m thinking about subscribing to topics and it shows you a good mix of communities where overlapping threads are kind of stacked or something and you could swipe cards to see comments from different communities about it or something. This is a tough one to figure out. Might not even be possible at all.
This sounds like PieFed
Haven’t heard of that and will look into that. Thank you.
Instance admins have crashed out before and things keep working
More people = more people that can moderate
Could you elaborate on the scalability problems of the fediverse in comparison to corporation owned platforms?
I fear communities are lacking resources and structure to handle the masses. It‘s something corporations already struggle with but they house like 10000 times more active users. One way to go around that was mentioned above and suggested that new users may keep creating new instances and communities so a few places don‘t just explode in size. But from my experience, if a community already covers a topic, there won‘t be much competition and we end up with a power mod environment (Reddit) at best and instances going dark from overload (hug of death) at worst.
But I don‘t want to sound too bleak about all of this. In the end these are challenges that someone might already work on.
Biggest problem with twitter/X is so many companies mess you around until you call them out on it, then things tend to get resolved how they should have been.
I truthfully have always seen that as Twitter/X's only use
It was the same on the municipal level for me. I can call 311 or write to them, but it was kind of nice to be able to tweet at my neighbourhood and have people interacting with them and me on local issues.
Might have to also let people know the Fediverse exists?
I mean, Mastodon is German, so they're probably moving here. The federated fork of Dorsey's Twitter is second.
BlueSky is not federated. Also German users have outsized representation on Mastodon but most of the network is outside Germany.
"federated"
There is always that one comment saying "b-but its technically kinda federated". It doesnt fucking matter if its federated if 99.999% of all users are on one instance. The entire concept of a long lived, enshittification resistant fediverse relies entirely on being decentralized with a reasonably evenly distributed userbase. You fucking bet lemmy would already be completely worthless right now if people hadnt stopped lemmy.world from grabbing more communities and users.
I agree with your overall sentiment but also literally 100% of BlueSky users are on one instance.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer piece of shit.
Those are rookie numbers, euros, get on that shit.
remember 80% of instagram is bots according to a study reported by german media.
so X id even say it could be more giving the vast hatred increase and content change over the last years. so basically they lost 90%%
Where did you read that? 80% would be insane if true
how can you respond to my deleted comment. I instantly deleted it after seeing a comment where I could add the same message under, so the discussion is more bundled
either way
funk's german post referenced this Imperva Bad Bot Report 2024
EDIT 74% not 80%, doesnt change anything tbh :D
I still see it too, interestingly
I see it too. I’m using the Voyager App on iOS. Maybe because of that?
Thanks for posting!
I would try deleting it again, sometimes edits/deletes don't federate.
::: spoiler well now its too late, might aswell
:::
Anecdotally, I watch reels on Instagram (i know) and the vast majority of meme pages that it shows me are the exact same setup around a slightly different premise, with the same purchased comments pinned from the same accounts or the accounts comment saying something like they're too broke for paid comments please like.
80% is probably high but I wouldn't be that surprised.
As an American I think I have a good way for the fediverse to gain momentum as people flee fascist US tech companies.
achem….
“Europe! Canada! Fucking HELP! We broke everything again!”
Seriously though, while government-run and “official” instances may not be a fit for many of us here, it could make huge strides with mainstream users. Maybe getting a large percentage of people invite onboard in a small country or two could be the seed that gets it to spread.
Europeans don't like Nazis.
Americans, well...
I wish this was true.
Greetings from Austria, where a far right party is the strongest, although not ruling (yet)
AfD Is Now Germany’s Most Popular Party For The First Time Ever.
I wish the 'Europeans don’t like Nazis.', would be true, but we maybe just lagging behind.
The Americans inspired them after all.
Read an interview with a youth researcher that said, he does not see a problem with the content moderation (regarding extremism) because young people are anyway not interested in the disussions on there because its only for porn...
twitter was used for Porn for most users, after the tumblr purge they all moved to twitter, or peopel curious about porn actors.
I hate X but I also dislike echo chambers
I also hate when people think an echo chamber is something inherently bad. Everything is an echo chamber. Your family, your friends, your local gaming community, your workplace. An echo chamber only becomes a problem when bad actors take control.
Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, or even Google. They give a shit about your wellbeing, as long as they profit.
Echo chambers are okay, no even necessary to stay mentally sane, as long as people share their honest takes without large scale agendas and manipulation.
You're using a different definition of "echo chamber" than I've ever heard of. What you're describing is groups of people sharing opinions that can differ with one another in good faith discussion. If differing views are being introduced its, by definition, not an echo chamber.
An echo chamber is when only one set of opinions are voiced, and all responses are in support of that opinion, hence the "echo" portion of the term.
The problem is, this is what fashies consider an “echo chamber”. The definition itself is not applied in good faith by certain cohorts. For example, people having good-faith debates are “liberal” echo chambers, because not toeing the alt-right fascist line is never considered to be good faith.
Fashies also have vastly different perverted definitions for all kinds of things like "freedom" and "peace", but I'm not adopting their definitions of those either. I'm not sure where you're going with this unless you're saying @[email protected] is a fascist, but I don't think you are saying that.
If we are throwing around big words, we have to be precise though.
Echo chambers always existed and we are in them all the time. A few hundreds or thousands years ago, we lived in small groups. Those definitely had different opinions, but overall had the same values. Those were echo chambers. Now, where those bad? No, you want people to be in line on foundational topics.
But if you start to manipulate these opinions on the ground level, you're going to divide people.
Global warming? Is it really that bad? Migrants? Aren't the stealing our jobs? LGBTQ+? Aren't they just harassing our kids and women? Hitler? Was he really that bad?????
Do you get what I mean? Echo chambers aren't the problem. They always existed. It's bad influence that turns everything to shit.
That's delusional. The try to cater to what will keep you engaged, so that as much of the data you can generate can be milked. That's like saying that agrobusiness cares about livestock's wellbeing.
Europe doesnt want federated services, they want censorship.
Saying that oil production lowers emissions by displacing coal will be called climate misinformation, saying immigration needs to be lower due to a housing crisis will be called hate speech, using Bitcoin instead of the digital euro will be called terrorist financing. They're already arresting people who do something as benign as retweet things, its a slippery slope.
Meanwhile, in reality, the EU funds lemmy's development.
Yeah, that's kinda hateful. True, it really would make things easier for EU citizens if less people were using the limited housing. But it would make things harder for the immigrants. Putting citizens over immigrants is... xenophobia.
Why waste the government's time solving the problem at poor people's expense, when the government could instead tax rich people more to pay for housing?
Putting citizens over non-citizens is called being a government.
Xenophobia is the irrational fear of foreign. And fear in this context usually shows up in the form of hate.
Putting citizens first does not mean hating the rest. Being a citizen of a country means that your government should represent you and your interests. It's only natural that it develops into benefits for citizens.
Xenophobia on a person level is when you see a person that you think is not part of your same origin, do you cross the street, or attack him or whatever. Of course this is not even close to being an exhaustive list.
Xenophobia on a country level is when you punish foreigners irrationally. Not letting foreigners into your country because you have a housing crisis is not irrational, it is a valid reason.
I find it hard to find examples of country-level xenophobia. Even if the act itself may seem xenophobic, the government may want to gain popular support of their xenophobic population, which would be a reason and thus non-xenophonic.
Of course, not being xenophobic does not mean it is good. For example Israel genociding Palestinians is horrible. But their reason is that having a neighbor that claims the same land as you do is problematic, and they figured if they just kill everyone the world will forget in 100-200 years (or less) while the land will be theirs for longer than that with no revels, since they genocided them. Of course, having a reason does not mean that it's not many other bad things (in this case, genocidal, which is worse than xenophobic).
No I wouldn't. Just like arguing a murder is not illegal grafitti, doesn't make you pro-murder. Arguing that a specific genocide is not xenophobia does not make me pro-genocide. I absolutely hate what Israel is doing to the Palestinians and I believe that someone should assassinate Netanyahu and all of his pro-genocide people on power of the Israeli government. Or imprison them for life.
But you can miss my point all you want.
I'm interested in everyone's wellbeing. Also, the government should represent its citizens' moral interests. It should teach them kindness by being an example.
Not valid. It's discrimination.
The results of an action being done for a reason being discriminatory does not make the reason invalid.
Almost any policy is discriminatory.
Taxing the rich more is discriminatory against the rich. Helping women out is discriminatory against the men. Ending segregation is discriminatory against people that don't want be near people different to them. The list is endless.
I assume you agree with all 3 of those policies. Yet they are discriminatory. Those 3 policies are done because of very valid reasons.
There are very few policies that I'd say are not desceiminatory. Like universal basic income or universal healthcare. And even then, by your definition of discriminatory, those would be discriminatory. Since they would still discriminate against non-citizens.
There is no world where a person born in X country that has never left X country to receive income from a UBI policy of Y country. Unless X and Y countries have some sort of deal where that happens.
I don't think that's why we're having this conversation. Seems like you're talking about technicalities and I'm talking about values. I don't think we can have a conversation like this.
This specific technicality is important for your point though.
I'm gonna explain my reasoning so you can choose whatever you want have a conversation about.
Your claim was that putting citizens above non-citizens is xenophobic.
My point is that putting citizens above non-citizens is a natural consequence of a state. And furthermore, that it is a good thing.
Xenophobia is widely regarded to be a bad thing and that we should avoid it.
If both of our statements are true. The natural conclusion is that we should have a stateless society. I don't think that a stateless society is a good thing. Therefore I'm trying to find a flaw in the argument. I think that the flaw is that you are wrong. So I have to have a conversation with you about why I think you are wrong.
If you are wrong, it must mean one of these statements are wrong:
Since 2/3 statements are made by me, of course I think they are true. So I'm going to argue about why the first one is wrong.
The only way to proof your statement to be wrong is by first defining what xenophobia is. Which you might call a technicality, but I don't think it's possible to have a conversation if we don't first agree what the meaning of the words we use is.
After defining what xenophobia is, we have to figure out if the "equation" is true: "putting citizens above non-citizens" = "xenophobia".
I'm a communist and I think we should have a stateless society.
The housing crisis is not because there are immigrants. It's because the vulture funds are buying everything they can to profit from it.
That's whataboutism.
There are many factors for the housing crisis.
That doesn't mean that you can only solve one of the factors.
If you had a zoo would you continue bringing in animals if they had no space left to live comfortably?
Likely you would call that inhumane, you wouldnt say they were being intolerant of the new animals if they did not.
People aren't zoo animals.
So cram them into substandard housing because they deserve less rights than animals?
You're not offering a tangible answer here, the argument is situational similarity, not ontological equivalence.
And you think telling immigrants they're not allowed to enter the country gives them more rights?
We don't have open borders, so we already do disallow entry. We just used to match it to capacity, which is what I'm saying is logical to do.
As a Dutchman, I agree we have great infrastructure and "walking" cities. But you've only seen Amsterdam. Outside of the cities, The Netherlands is more dependent on cars than you might think. I live on the border of the country and public transport is basically non existent and cycling is not viable due to travel distances, every adult has a car in my area. A family of 4 adults (children over 18 living at home) have 4 cars parked in front of their house here. We're not as car dependent as the US, but we don't live in a fairytale either.
Try to go to an anti-genocide protest in EU and see how fast you get violently beat up, arrested or get cops at your door to have "a chat". All tose things in Amsterdam you mentioned too.
Still not happened to me yet, and that is in the UK which has the far more authoritarian Policing Bill looming over us. That doesn't make as interesting a soundbite though.
Your individual experiences don't negate all the things I mentioned, they are on video.
And whatever bill you're under doesn't matter to other countries, they always find a reason or 'special circumstances' to break their own laws and act like hired goons for the zionist apartheid state.
Yeah, Israel is shit, but unless you have a video for each of these protests being shut down in this way, that just isn't the norm. Plenty of pro-Palestine protests and meetings here; outside Barclays, protesting specific businesses, sharing information in our most popular streets for tourism and shopping, musical protests at art galleries. Plenty going on, never even seen a police presence at these.
Not to say it isn't happening, but trying to paint Europe as some pro-Zionist totality is weird.
you're a hasbara liar plain and simple
Not sure how talking about local and country-wide support for Palestine, and against the zionist genocide enacted by Israel, makes me supportive of Israel but everyone is entitled to their opinion.
Spain is part of the EU and nobody is "violently beat up", arrested or having a visit from the cops for going to an anti-genocide protest.
I know the problem with foam bullets.
Christ, this is such a stupid take. You'd think that someone who was around on the fediverse would have an inkling about just how many instances are based in the EU and Germany in particular.
Just because a country or userbase wants a degree of moderation and accountability, and doesn't tolerate hate speech, doesn't mean that views are censored. Basic Popperism stuff right there.
Arresting people for retweeting? Really? Can you provide a source?
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/policing-speech-online-germany-60-minutes-transcript/
The article cites a case of online harassment from right wingers towards an immigration friendly politician that was ultimately shot. Are you seriously using this in defense of "but muh free speech?!"
"No, you have free speech as well, but it is also has its limits."
Which is true. A lot of Europe learnt from World War II that certain types of speech should not be tolerated. In the rest of the article there are examples given - neo-Nazis for one. I am not particularly keen on tolerating the freedom of speech of Nazis or others that call for genocide and killing.
Oh boy...
Too true. EC's constant attacks on encryption is worrying to say the least. I hope nothing goes thru.