Donald Trump To Launch Social Media Platform Called Truth Social (theguardian.com) 387
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Donald Trump has announced plans to launch a social media platform called TRUTH Social that will rolled be out early next year. The former president, who was banned from Facebook and Twitter earlier this year, says his goal is to rival the tech companies that have denied him the megaphone that was paramount to his rise. "I'm excited to soon begin sharing my thoughts on TRUTH social and to fight back against big tech," Trump said in a statement. Trump announced the news in a press release on Wednesday, saying the platform will be open to "invited users" for a beta launch in November, with plans to make it available to the broader public in the beginning of next year. Truth social will be a product of a new venture called the Trump Media & Technology Group which was created through a merger with Digital World Acquisition Corp. The group said it seeks to become a publicly listed company. Users can sign up to be put on a waiting list or pre-order the app via the App Store.
Public (Score:2)
Would shareholders back a company that excludes large swaths of the population as potential customers?
Re:Public (Score:5, Informative)
You know Trump is gonna stiff everyone for payments. Not like it hasn't happened before
https://www.usatoday.com/story... [usatoday.com]
https://www.newsweek.com/trump... [newsweek.com]
https://www.wusa9.com/article/... [wusa9.com]
Re: (Score:3)
That USA Today Network article is behaving weird... the ad insert repeatedly told me to watch Thursday Night Football on Amazon Prime tonight. Waste of bandwidth, the same show's on Fox!
The real reason (Score:3)
The Wall Street Journal explains this money making scam.
https://archive.md/LZESA [archive.md]
Re:Public (Score:5, Interesting)
The plethora of biased media outlets that are essentially boycotted by anyone not in the target audience suggests there's a strong business case for polarized content,.
For Trump personally, on one hand he is a person known for bilking vendors and losing investor money in many business endeavors, on the other hand he has demonstrated success milking celebrity for celebrity's sake, which would align with this sort of platform.
Re: Public (Score:4, Insightful)
In other words, investors might make money on this, but most likely indirectly (through Trump wrecking stuff, maybe pumping a stock or a token or two) not on the actual company's profits.
Re: Public (Score:4, Insightful)
Considering his only other publicly traded company lost money every single year [marketwatch.com] when he personally ran the company while his competitors were raking in money hand over fist, it's not difficult to see how this current endeavor will end.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, but this may be more up his alley. A social media platform that can be relatively low on assets or other concerns that are generally associated with businesses of substance that Trump does poorly with, but linked to his image and just needs a decent population of people obsessed with his image (after pretty much everything about his character out in the wild, he still had 74 million votes and a large contingency of those demonstrating unwavering loyalty and commitment to him). He raised more than $
Re:Public (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Public (Score:5, Interesting)
Not only that, but would a public company allow users to post whatever they want and not have the content moderated or deleted, and will the member never get banned? That is a major grip of his and part of the reason why he's creating this company.
Is Trump still in favor of eliminating section 230 protections now that he's starting his own media company?
Re:Public (Score:5, Insightful)
If this "social media" platform is actually controlled by Trump you can be assured that anyone on it that disagrees with his strongly held beliefs will be summarily banned.
Re:Public (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
I would add to his strong beliefs that he is never wrong. He also strongly believes in never showing "weakness" (whatever that may be to him). He strongly believes that he should attack anyone who ever says he is wrong about anything - personal attacks, legal attacks, etc. He believes he should never forget a grudge.
Have I missed anything?
Re:Public (Score:5, Insightful)
Not only that, but would a public company allow users to post whatever they want and not have the content moderated or deleted, and will the member never get banned? That is a major grip of his and part of the reason why he's creating this company.
Is Trump still in favor of eliminating section 230 protections now that he's starting his own media company?
If there's anyone who believes that Trump's company will "allow users to post whatever they want and not have the content moderated or deleted" then I have a security backed by a Trump loan [nytimes.com] to sell them.
Re:Public (Score:5, Insightful)
According to https://www.cfr.org/blog/2020-... [cfr.org]
"Biden won 81,283,098 votes, or 51.3 percent of the votes cast. He is the first U.S. presidential candidate to have won more than 80 million votes. Trump won 74,222,958 votes, or 46.8 percent of the votes cast. That’s more votes than any other presidential candidate has ever won, with the exception of Biden. (Third-party candidates picked up 1.8 percent of the votes cast.)"
Re:Public (Score:5, Insightful)
The increase in voter turnout is simply not possible.
Trump offended a lot of people and was pivotal in motivating 81 million people to come out and vote against him more than anything else. Biden was never considered a great candidate, but his biggest appeal was that he wasn't trump. I honestly think that if Hillary had run in 2020, she would have received the same 81 million votes because Trump turned out to be worse than those folks that skipped voting in 2016 imagined.
Re: (Score:3)
With average voter turnouts always in the 50% range, you're saying that it's impossible that a few million of the other 50% might have shown up to force Trump to pack it in?
You have no fucking clue what you are talking about, and should probably just stop posting. And that goes for the whole Internet. You fail at math, logic, and critical thinking.
Re:Public (Score:5, Interesting)
As a percentage of total turnout, and by raw count, yes.. but very barely. But Trump actually performed significantly worse in 2020 compared to his main party competitor.
However, given that a much higher vote count went to the two main party candidates (instead of independents or third party) than in the previous election, trump performed a bit worse compared to the Democratic candidate.
2016: vote percentage to main party candidates: 94
2016: Trump got 95.38% of the vote count that hillary received)
2020: vote percentage to main party candidates: 98
2020: Trump got 91.36% of the vote count bidens received
I am weary to assume that Trump (or Biden's) votes indicate approval of that person. I believe this time around there was a higher voter turnout for "not the other guy" than we typically see.
Re:Public (Score:4, Informative)
Maybe. But more Americans voted for him this time round than before.
And more Americans voted against him than any president ever in history.
The great thing about dishonest application of statistics is they can be used against you.
Re:Public (Score:5, Informative)
most people on the planet really don't like him.
Most people in your own echo chamber don't like him.
No, 64% of the human race basically thinks he's a moron: https://www.pewresearch.org/gl... [pewresearch.org]
Re:Public (Score:5, Funny)
No, 64% of the human race basically thinks he's a moron: https://www.pewresearch.org/gl... [pewresearch.org]
I think what you have said is deeply offensive to morons everywhere.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I am a (former) Republican. I permanently left the GOP when I saw everyone throwing around "communist" and "socialist" about everything non-Republican like they were retards that had learned a new cuss word. The only echo chamber is the one you are living in. Several of my friends were so fed up with Trump spewing outright lies, especially about COVID, that they actually voted for Biden. I couldn't bring myself to do that since he's a bit of a war hawk but I did vote Independent. You're just gonna have to a
Re: Public (Score:2)
They plan to IPO?
Re: Public (Score:4, Funny)
God, I hope so. I'll sell all my shares in Trump Airlines, Trump Steaks, and Trump Vodka and put all my money into Trump Truth Social.
Re: Public (Score:5, Insightful)
who is Twitter excluding? The people they banned? Or the people who left because some others were banned?
I'm not sure you understand the term "large swaths" - there's a snowball's chance in hell that Truth Social doesn't kick people out for not "belonging" to a far greater degree than a platform like Twitter on which many of the public figures of the right still enjoy massive audiences
the idea that Twitter is some bastion of one line of thought is a sad reflection a person who thinks that
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Public (Score:5, Insightful)
Without question.
So far, every right-wing "free speech platform" has been far more draconian than any of the mainstream services. Parler started banning speech that wasn't 'conservative' enough almost immediately. Gettr famously banned Roger Stone while (allegedly) trying to get rid of parody accounts, which is bad enough, but most people think it was because he was openly critical of Steve Bannon.
It makes sense, really. They have to advertise completely unrestricted speech, which is very attractive to the worst people on the internet. If you think Slashdot is bad now, imagine it with no moderation and with the ability to post pictures, video, and unicode...
"Truth" Social is a special case. See, it's got "truth" right there in the name. They'll ban anyone they don't on the basis of "truth". They will, of course, have a very different idea about what the 'truth' is than those of us living in reality.
Re: (Score:3)
> who is Twitter excluding?
No one. Twitter is all inclusive... they even allow actual terrorists AND allow them to make threats on twitter too.
https://www.theatlantic.com/in... [theatlantic.com]
https://jewishinsider.com/2020... [jewishinsider.com]
Can I predict (Score:5, Insightful)
"Called TRUTH Social"
Can I predict that it will be both untruthful and antisocial.
Re:Can I predict (Score:4, Funny)
"Called TRUTH Social"
Can I predict that it will be both untruthful and antisocial.
Sorry, but looking at the lunch menu and telling people what's for lunch tomorrow does not qualify as a prediction. Likewise, whatever Trump SAYS is just a menu for what he doesn't mean.
Re: (Score:3)
Also just wondering who Trump will blame when this thing does not turn out to be that big of a succes.
This is getting old.
Re: Can I predict (Score:2)
Most likely it will. But I see a way to make it work on a robust invite only basis. That's probably overdue for any social network.
Re: Can I predict (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-truth-social-hacked-within-hours-announcement-1641137 [newsweek.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"Ministry of Truth" would be appropriate on so many different levels
Re:Can I predict (Score:4, Funny)
Like any country called "Democratic Republic of .... "
You do realise that the USA is a republic that practices representative democracy? ... i.e. a Democratic Republic.
You do realise that the USA is not called "The Democratic Republic of the United States of America" and that, therefore, your comment is irrelevant?
Re: (Score:3)
You do realise that the USA is a republic that practices representative democracy?
Its like riding a bike. Don't give up, keep practicing and you'll eventually get the hang of it.
Re:Can I predict (Score:5, Funny)
MAGA types don't understand words.
So is that why I get confused every time I see them use the word "socialism" to describe a health care law that requires everyone to sign up for health insurance that is overwhelmingly provided by for-profit corporations? Hmm, now I'm starting to wonder if all those reference to communism were inappropriate, too?
One place for all the hate (Score:3, Insightful)
So it'll be full of nazi's and racists?
Cool, least maybe they might get off the other platforms.
Goodluck to them scaling it without AWS etc hosting the service, they don't stand a chance
Re: (Score:2)
Oh it's going to be a glorious spectacle. If you ever saw how voat.co turned out, you'll know where this goes.
Re:One place for all the hate (Score:5, Interesting)
The hacks of this surely shoddily-assembled site should yield lots of interesting data valuable to HR departments and anti-terrorism officials alike!
Re: (Score:3)
If you ever saw how voat.co turned out, you'll know where this goes.
Damn you!
Here I was, finishing up my coffee and having a quick peruse of Slashdot as I waited for a VM to finish booting and a VPN to finish connecting when I saw your comment. I had not heard about voat.co before today; it is now half an hour later and I am much more informed about voat.co, see the relevance to the former president's latest train wreck, AND am now behind in my work for the day.
Again, damn you!
Re: (Score:3)
Goodluck to them scaling it without AWS etc hosting the service, they don't stand a chance
Pfft. Who needs AWS when you'll be as big as or bigger than AWS and Google Cloud [reuters.com]
In a slide deck on its website, the company envisions eventually competing against Amazon.com's AWS cloud service and Google Cloud.
Re: (Score:2)
Russia will gladly host it .. if it destroys the US .. they will be there to lend a hand to their ally / traitor to his nation DJT who does all that he can to destroy the USA from within and help Russia win the war without having to fire a single shot. That's what Trump's doing. Destroying the USA for the russkies.
Re: (Score:3)
If Russia hosts it, the good folks at Pravda might sue for trademark infringement.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:One place for all the hate (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you okay with Amazon deciding what content is allowed on the internet?
Yes, Amazon with being a private company. Are you suggesting government intervention to the market?
Re: (Score:3)
This is one of the rare occasions where I might consider government intervention, yes. I don't mean and flatly reject intervention like "Amazon you have to host this content." That's unreasonable and doesn't address the root problem. The root problem is that one company should not monopolize hosting services. A company that did that would need to be split up. The raw numbers (AWS hosts %5 of the web's content and 50% of the top 10,000 sites) say that AWS isn't a true monopoly yet.
When the idea of hostin
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
If anything allowing this, in some cases literally, Nazi bullshiat is what got us past the Schwarzschild radius of derp and stupidity. The Beer Gut Putsch where all the cop killers, terrorists, and traitors broke into the Capitol, the theoretical sea
Re:One place for all the hate (Score:4, Informative)
You seems to see anyone "planning to overthrow the government by force or the the extra-judicial kidnapping / executions" to be "terrorists / traitors". This is only correct when the government is democratic. The protestors in the Capitol of USA disagree. They see the election was being cheated. You may call them being brainwashed / hallucinated, but they probably see you being the one who are brainwashed / hallucinated.
There are not two sides to every story. In particular the most grotesque examples, like the Holocaust, there is only one side that is right and it wasn't the Nazis. The truth of the matter is this goes far deeper than just Trump, he just capitalized on the reflexive anti-democratic sentiment of people having to adjust with not being the sole source of power. Ironically enough, your pathetic attempt at equivocation is a prime example of what drives this idiocy. I mean, lets look at the last few years and you'll see right-wing Republican terrorists coddled in comparison. I mean, some of them have executed, literally executed, cops. Still, people equivocate.
I am not an USA citizen nor USA resident. As an East Asian with a long culture and history dealing with examination, cheating in examination, catching cheating in examination etc, it is a known rule not just the candidates but also the examiners cannot be trusted. Allowing wide-spread postal voting in an important election with controversial candidates is so wrong in so many ways that I can never understand why you guys could allow that to happen in the first place. It can strongly undermine the credibility and trust to the election result and indeed it is undermined successfully.
As a lifelong resident of the USA, watching both sides for decades, you are a complete idiot. Not only are you a complete idiot, but you are either a troll or a paid agitator talking out of your backside. As a matter of point, fraud in US elections is incredibly low. That's why whenever you see Republicans whining about it, they never offer any proof under oath. They offer "opinions" under oath, but never pronounce what they are spouting as facts. That last part is important. When you are under oath, versus just spouting for the masses, there are legal penalties for lying to the court. That's why whenever Rudy or Sydney or any of the crew were in court they were like "No, we're not arguing that your Honor..." because they knew they had zero proof that Italians hacked the election via satellite. That's why Cyber Ninjas carefully couched everything as an opinion and didn't say "Ahhh HA!!!! FRUAD! TOTES TOLD YOU ALL! WOOT! DJT IS PREZZ AGAIN!"
As another side, mail in ballots have an even lower fraud rate than in person ballots because it seems like Republicans like to double vote in two counties or (sometimes) two different states. I mean, you might want to do some research into fraud rates because not everyone is stuffing ballots like Vlad.
Sorry, anyone who claim banning postal voting to general public is "voter suppression" is the true traitor of democracy. If voting on a particular date in a particular period of time is too hard for some people in some job post, the solution is lengthening that voting period. There may be a need of special voting setup for soldiers in outpost and patients in hospitals, but there are no excuses for any other people. If they don't go to a voting station by themselves, it is either the problem of voting period, the problem of voting stations location / number, or just that they don't care the election enough. If you really want everyone vote, one can make law that set voting a legal requirement of all citizens, then prosecute any companies that don't give their employees at least a half-day-leave on election day.
Your astounding ignorance, or paid troll attitude tovarich, is showing. However, let's have fun and run with your idiotic premise. I mean, if you think voting by mail is bad and fraught with f
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not saying all republicans are racist. I'm just saying I've never seen a Biden flag at a Proud Boys rally.
Re: (Score:3)
No see the troll you're responding to is recycling the old conservative adage that Democrats are racist because they keep talking about race. It makes about as much sense as branding a pro law and order political candidate as pro crime because they keep talking about crime but it's definitely a thing for some conservatives.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh you're a hoot, thanks for showing up.
I'm sorry to put a dent in your ideology but white liberals think that because non-whites are in fact less likely to have photo ID http://www.projectvote.org/wp-... [projectvote.org] https://www.aclu.org/other/opp... [aclu.org] https://www.economist.com/demo... [economist.com] https://www.politifact.com/fac... [politifact.com] https://www.newsweek.com/voter... [newsweek.com] .
Your post helped to reinforce my own point though so you have that going for you. Thanks!
Re: (Score:3)
I never said anything about race,
Um, yes, you did. I literally quoted you.
And that makes me the "troll"? Ok, lol
The Soviet did it over 100 years ago (Score:3, Informative)
Why not Call it PRAVDA? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
He already got the name from Vladimir. Why screw up a good translation?
Re: (Score:2)
The real question is... (Score:5, Insightful)
If the site is going to get hacked before launch, or if they're wait until after it gets launched to hack it.
Either way, folks who sign up early should expect their information and security questions to be publicly posted somewhere by the end of the year.
Re: (Score:2)
If the site is going to get hacked before launch, or if they're wait until after it gets launched to hack it.
Either way, folks who sign up early should expect their information and security questions to be publicly posted somewhere by the end of the year.
And that makes ...them bad. For, er, some reason.
Re: (Score:2)
What I'm saying is that most of the IT folks who actually know how to properly secure things tend to work for big tech companies with Liberal leanings. Trump is probably going to end up with some amateur outfit building his site like the bozos who built Parler, and it's going to get pwned in a matter of weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
Either way, folks who sign up early should expect their information and security questions to be publicly posted somewhere by the end of the year.
So I take it your are predicting the service to launch on Dec 31?
Re:The real question is... (Score:5, Informative)
Either way, folks who sign up early should expect their information and security questions to be publicly posted somewhere by the end of the year.
They hacked it allready as we speak :D
Trump's Truth Social Hacked Within Hours of Announcement. https://www.newsweek.com/trump... [newsweek.com]
Re: (Score:3)
And they have already started blocking people:
"I literally just registered 'mikepence.' ... In a subsequent tweet, he revealed that account had been suspended.
I feel sorry for everyone who has the same name as a major politician. I wonder how many people are out there named "Donald Trump" "Joe Biden" or "Michael Bolton."
Re: The real question is... (Score:3)
The left has always said that Putin controls all of world's hackers
The left (whatever that is) has never said that; youâ(TM)re inventing a straw man because you think it makes you look clever.
Great (Score:2)
I'm looking forward to seeing AOC and Ilhan Omar welcomed to this new inclusive platform.
Where's the problem? (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, as soon as they start vomiting hate, xenophobes, etc. comments that are not deleted, the website will be blocked for violating the Human Rights and many Laws in many countries.
So, if they want to waste money into building an infrastructure for spreading hate and violence, be my guest.
No problem as soon as they violate Human Rights its IP address get blocked right away.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
They're using Mastadon code.
Standard Trump naming (Score:2)
Maybe it is a good thing (Score:2)
It might remove the former's alleged president's enthusiasts from Twitter, Facebook, etc. so they can all have a giant incestuous angry frenzy all by themselves for themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
It actually says something that Islamic militants like ISIS have a better understanding of the twitter TOS than Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump understands it fine, he just gives zero fucks.
All his life he's been used to getting his way.
Becoming president emboldened him in the same way that it emboldened thousands of other shitlords.
Could it be ... (Score:2)
Is this the Facebook rebranding?
WHOIS information (Score:5, Informative)
https://whois.domaintools.com/truthsocial.com [domaintools.com]
Information Below - it was just updated earlier this morning:
Domain Name: TRUTHSOCIAL.COM
Registry Domain ID: 1687853954_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.tucows.com
Registrar URL: http://tucowsdomains.com/ [tucowsdomains.com]
Updated Date: 2021-10-19T14:39:13
Creation Date: 2011-11-18T19:13:50
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2023-11-18T19:13:50
Registrar: TUCOWS, INC.
Registrar IANA ID: 69
Reseller: Aron Wagner
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientTr... [icann.org]
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited https://icann.org/epp#clientUp... [icann.org]
Registry Registrant ID:
Registrant Name: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0162686270
Registrant Organization: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0162686270
Registrant Street: 96 Mowat Ave
Registrant City: Toronto
Registrant State/Province: ON
Registrant Postal Code: M6K 3M1
Registrant Country: CA
Registrant Phone: +1.4165385457
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax:
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: domainabuse@tucows.com
Registry Admin ID:
Admin Name: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0162686270
Admin Organization: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0162686270
Admin Street: 96 Mowat Ave
Admin City: Toronto
Admin State/Province: ON
Admin Postal Code: M6K 3M1
Admin Country: CA
Admin Phone: +1.4165385457
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax:
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: voyagerarms1776@gmail.com
Registry Tech ID:
Tech Name: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0162686270
Tech Organization: Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0162686270
Tech Street: 96 Mowat Ave
Tech City: Toronto
Looks like it's hosted by CDN77
Re: (Score:2)
CDN77 has a UK telephone number? Why isn't this great patriot using American companies to host his truthful content?
Re: (Score:3)
this looks to be in Toronto, Canada.
Good luck! (Score:2)
I wish him the same good fortune he's had with his other stellarly-producing ventures. The only downside is that his users won't be able to sue him after the fact, like with TrumpU, since they won't be paying him for the privilege of posting their right-wing insanity.
And of course . . . (Score:2)
It will be Zune compatible . . .
I'm Mr. Meeseeks, look at me! (Score:2)
Defeated useless Former Guy begs for attention ... film at 11
His account on it already got hacked (Score:2)
Let's remember (Score:2, Insightful)
That it's useful to keep an object of hate in the public consciousness.
Congress just found Steve Bannon 'in contempt of congress' (LOL who isn't?) for not showing up for some public whipping over crap that supposedly happened years ago.
Donald Trump was a buffoon as a president, who only was elected because nobody took him seriously in either the GOP nor DNC, and both underestimated the willingness of the public to vote for any clown that didn't seem to be part of the swamp.
And we see how that turned out.
He'
Re:Let's remember (Score:5, Informative)
Steve Bannon is already a convicted felon and I love how you phrase "supposedly happened" when we have live streams of people interrupting high level government proceedings. He's in contempt for not complying with the Jan 6th investigation.
Re: (Score:3)
By "crap that supposedly happened years ago" you mean the armed insurgency against the Capitol building that happened in January.
It will be a long time before he is forgotten, not least because many in the GQP think he should still be president.
Re:Let's remember (Score:4, Informative)
January 6 is not "years ago". And the investigation is being slowed by the GOP, who try every trick in the book to delay and gum up.
Re:Let's remember (Score:5, Informative)
Congress just found Steve Bannon 'in contempt of congress' (LOL who isn't?) for not showing up for some public whipping over crap that supposedly happened years ago.
By years ago you mean this year. This year. And by "public whipping" you mean a subpoena. Other than those two blatant twisting of the facts, you almost got that right.
Rigged instant success (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd bet money they will pull a Google+ and pre-populate the users with a list of profiles the GOP has on hand. That way they can claim they already have x million users on day 1 and what a success it is. I'd also wager they will NEVER release any metrics on actual users and deny any reports from 3rd parties regarding traffic or actual user base.
No Censorship whatsoever... (Score:2)
'Containment website' (Score:2)
a NEW conservative-friendly social media platform? (Score:2)
So this is a NEW conservative-friendly social media platform? Will this one be as successful as PillowTalk (or whatever Mike Lindell called his new conservative friendly social media platform that we've heard very little about since it was launched and promptly hacked)? And besides, I thought we already had Parler and Rumble. So what's purpose does this one server? Rhetorical question...I know it's too difficult for Trump to profit from his idiot squad vomiting all over those platforms. Just imaging having
Domain... (Score:2)
Has anyone bought the domain name yet? ;-)
#1 followed user = Rosie O'Donnell (Score:2)
If this models Twitter, how funny would it be if a bunch of people signed up and "followed" an account for Rosie O'Donnell (and/or Obama) surpassing Trump's popularity on his own site.
The only problem with doing that would be they would claim all those accounts as real users to demonstrate what a success it is.
Orwellian (Score:5, Insightful)
A social network run by Trump called "TRUTH social" strikes me as one of the most Orwellian https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] things I've heard of in quite some time. Its title alone certainly seems to be an excellent example of doublethink https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] when one considers Trump's relationship with what most of would call truth.
Ministry of Truth (Score:3)
We all need to get ahead of this and start talking about it as "The Ministry of Truth" online so we can get that nickname cemented in the public mind before he even starts.
"Truth" is dead. (Score:5, Interesting)
Simply as a word, "truth" is done, and should be abandoned to the scrap heap of linguistic history. It used to be that "truth"was the domain of philosophers, but it has been co-opted and degraded. At the very least, it's official definition should be altered to read something like, "Supporting the narrative of the speaker, regardless of veracity."
"Fact", despite "alternative", is still hanging in there. Fight to keep that one. But just give up on "truth".
It's Mastodon (Score:5, Interesting)
And it's in violation of AGPLv3. Finally, some news for open source nerds.
https://www.vice.com/en/articl... [vice.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:TDS still going strong (Score:4, Insightful)
Trump attempted a coup and interrupt our 240+ years of tradition of peaceful transitions of power. He still prowls the back alley looking for an opportunity, he is metaphorically checking the locks on our democracy. He lies constantly and attempts to substitute truth for a delusion where is ego is the central figure. He works to normalize lying in our culture, especially in the political realm, and his understudies and cult followers now do the same because there is no downside to lying anymore. He commands complete loyalty from approximately one third of the population who would trade our Democratic Republic for a Trumpian autocracy in a heartbeat.