Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I resigned from Twitter

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 1001 posts

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#591

Post by mtoddsmith »

cletus wrote: post #419
spion wrote: post #352

Twitter and other social media are probably the biggest problem of our time. By providing simple rules of information flow: small amount of content, retweet, followers) and rewards (likes), they've created the most efficient engines for finding and spreading novelty at the expense of everything else. There are no incentives to improve accuracy, increase thoughtfulness, paint nuance. Fact checking gets lost in the win…

The real problem here is people, not the platforms or the products. How do I know this? Because the problems have existed far longer than any of the platforms. Maybe people here are too young to remember how toxic, argumentative, irrational and judgmental everything else was that came previously: forums, mailing lists, Usenet, you name it. Sure products can influence user behaviour but they can't totally change it. A…

The difference with the new platforms is their ability to push content to users. And that content can be driven by bad actors.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#592

Post by spion »

cletus wrote: post #419
spion wrote: post #352

Twitter and other social media are probably the biggest problem of our time. By providing simple rules of information flow: small amount of content, retweet, followers) and rewards (likes), they've created the most efficient engines for finding and spreading novelty at the expense of everything else. There are no incentives to improve accuracy, increase thoughtfulness, paint nuance. Fact checking gets lost in the win…

The real problem here is people, not the platforms or the products. How do I know this? Because the problems have existed far longer than any of the platforms. Maybe people here are too young to remember how toxic, argumentative, irrational and judgmental everything else was that came previously: forums, mailing lists, Usenet, you name it. Sure products can influence user behaviour but they can't totally change it. A…

We should have (software) systems that amplify our strengths and help us deal with our flaws, not the other way around.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#593

Post by riffic »

Spooky23 wrote: post #537
ChuckMcM wrote: post #259

It will be interesting to see how Twitter changes as a result. Twitter with selective following and setting your timeline to 'time order' creates a pretty good environment for me. It feels like the equivalent of living in only a few chosen 'subreddits' rather than getting the full frontal reddit experience.

I'm sure the first change will be the redemption of a certain political figure.

why bother. certain political figure has their own Mastodon installation now.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#594

Post by handrous »

maxsilver wrote: post #540
nostrademons wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of the value that a CEO adds is in figuring out which rules can be broken without adverse consequences. They're accountable for results; if they raise shareholder value doing terrible things but never get caught, that's a win for shareholders, and they get to keep their position. If they do get caught, they get to be the fall guy, they resign, the board gets to say "We are shocked that such things occurred, we h…

> The average person doesn't like to inhabit the Hobbesian reality that CEOs do, where they're accountable for results and any bad things happening are automatically their fault Does this actually happen though? I'm not sure I've ever seen a President or CEO of a company be held accountable for bad behavior or bad decisions in any meaningful way. Best case scenario, you mess up and get "fired" (with a million-dollar-…

This is similar to why the argument that capitalists are due returns because they take on risk doesn't move me. Please, give me the "risk" of having somewhat-fewer millions in the bank. I'll take on all that risk. For free! Meanwhile workers will be in deep shit if their company goes under and they don't find something else ASAP. Risk, indeed. The absolute worst-case scenario is that they might have to work for a living? Oh my, what horror.

This isn't to say that investors shouldn't make money, I just find this (often presented as) quasi-moral justification for it absurd.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#595

Post by szundi »

williamtrask wrote: post #567
SavantIdiot wrote: post #558

Ironic that his very own medium is insufficient to convey enough information, so he has to post a picture of a document. smh.

The medium supports images so I’m not sure this critique is valid.

Like it was not abvious what the replyee meant.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#597

Post by NoGravitas »

carapace wrote: post #504
sporkland wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an open mind about it and have seen it many times, but I struggle with the leaps of logic required to understand the one proposition of conservatism. On its face it is obviously unfair, and it's hard for me to see it as the obvious consequence of conservatism which is "heavily trust the past and move forward with caution". Can you help me connect the two or at least help me understand the underlying propositio…

It's two different meanings for the word "conservatism". You're quoting the more traditional meaning (for example "environmental conservatism" or "fiscal conservatism") whereas Wilhoit is using it to name an (in his view) ancient and universal political philosophy that he believes subsumes all others. (FWIW I think he's got the wrong word. He says "For millenia, conservatism had no name..." and then cites divine righ…

Well, to be fair to Wilhoit, the divine right of kings was only asserted after the threat of other models of (conservative) government were asserted, to try to justify something that had previously never seemed to need justification.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#598

Post by phreack »

skytreader wrote: post #251
phreack wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a lifesaver in countries with rampant inflation where they forbid you to buy currencies from other countries. Literally in some cases.

So, it's easy to find a list of the countries with the highest inflation rates, but which of those countries actually forbid individuals from acquiring foreign currency? I assume you have a verifiable example? Not to mention, for an everyman living in one of these countries, how feasible is it to actually participate in crypto to the point where it is useful in day-to-day living ? How much upfront investment will it…

Yeah I'm talking about Argentina.

It's not so much a day to day living with crypto kind of situation but rather a being able to save one. Say you have a salary that's getting devalued by the month yet doesn't raise at the same rate.

If you're lucky enough to be able to save say 10% of it, you want to stabilize it's value somehow. I don't even mean invest at a profit, I mean have a way to save that money so when you do need to spend it down the line (say to buy a 100k USD no-bedroom apartment to live in), you wouldn't have lost most of your savings' value due to inflation.

You can't hold value in land since there's no credit, cars are 10x as expensive due to the economy being so protectionist, and you likely don't have space to hold a stock of long-lasting food that you might be able to sell. Crypto, particularly stable coins, is then a very attractive option in such a situation. You could buy 50 DAI a month for example and then have a good shot that when you need it a few years later, it'll still be as valuable as it was when you bought it.

A lot of old people who trusted cash and didn't realize how bad things are getting and didn't invest in a solid keeper of value, are only now realizing that their whole life savings are worth about as much as a TV, and even less every month.

Nowadays, even kids need to learn about exchange rates to keep up.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#599

Post by dragontamer »

spion wrote: post #563
dragontamer wrote: post #446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2011647630/ William Randolph Hearst ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Randolph_Hearst ) did all of this first in the early 1900s. (Along with his rival Pulitzer. But the image above is clearly in Hearst's image, a fact probably lost to the modern audience) The "problems" you state are far older than Twitter, and its best to study history and the problem of "Yellow Journalism".…

Some the problems are old... and some are new. The old press was broadcast-only and had to catter to the lowest common denominator. As a result, at least some people were immune. The new "press" is crowdsourced and tailored just for you. Social media doesn't even have to do research on what works or what doesn't on who. Natural selection by means of retweeting does all the work. You can find misinformation of all lev…

> You can find misinformation of all levels of sophistication, all the way to incorrect scientific papers if thats your shtick.

This isn't new at all. "More doctors smoke Camel Cigarettes". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCMzjJjuxQI

And the Tobacco industry funded all types of scientific papers, that were published all over the place to demonstrate Tobacco's "health benefits".

-------

The only reason we can't find examples older than maybe the mid 1900s or so, was because doctors weren't even trusted until the 1900s. 1800s doctors were well recognized as quacks and had very little reputation among the American people. So there was no reason to use doctors as a propaganda point back then.

Re: I resigned from Twitter

#600

Post by MarkLowenstein »

crocodiletears wrote: post #433
Tycho wrote: post #384

Prediction: more censorship and narrative protection incoming.

This is my concern as well. Twitter already has significant issues with this. But based on Dorsey's Rogan appearances I get the impression that he was never entirely comfortable with playing the arbiter of truth/acceptable content outside of high profile cases. He deferred to his trust and safety team most of the time, though you can still find a lot of enclaves that a platform like facebook might have preemptively p…

It is likely that the censorship and massaging of visibility is done by a team composed largely of ideological activists. Dorsey as a founder and leader would have the sense of ownership that would allow him to push back on that. I would expect that team to steamroll over the new CEO because his ownership is weaker.
Post reply on HN