Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#251

Post by zarzavat » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:14 PM UTC

qgin wrote: post #113

“Everything that isn’t illegal is allowed” sounds great until you see what that actually means on the internet. Anyone who has ever worked in content moderation / trust & safety knows what kind of unrelenting deluge of obnoxious / disturbing / spam-filled / miserable race to the bottom of the lizard brain stuff that is constantly being pushed back on any moderately popular social media site. It seems so easy from a d…

Musk has a reputation for craziness but if you look at his engineering decisions at SpaceX his record there is highly pragmatic. So the question is: which Musk is buying Twitter?

I personally don’t believe he means that he wants to turn Twitter into 4chan. Rather what he’s saying is that nobody should be censored on Twitter for the content of their (otherwise civil) speech. There is a wide gulf of possible moderation policy choices between current Twitter and 4chan that he could park it at.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#252

Post by bannedbybros » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:15 PM UTC

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#253

Post by tomp » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:15 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #147

Honest question, why can Elon, and only Elon solve the bot problem? Software devs have been trying to solve this problem since the beginning of the internet and yet bots still fill every space on the web.

Elon has the ability (and motivation) to look beyond next quarter. Bots increase “monthly active users” metric, so short-term thinking management likes them.

Elon can afford to think long-term.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#254

Post by Jaruzel » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:16 PM UTC

The ONLY way to solve the toxic nature of Twitter is to enforce a)a real name policy, and b)fully verified[1] identities for all users/bots (opt-in, where others by default filter out non-verified accounts in their feeds)

Bots can continue to exist, but must be identifiable as such and connected to a verified real user.

Not only will this clean up twitter dramatically, it will also push off those who wish to hide behind anonymous hate speech - they'll flock to somewhere else, and good riddance to them.

Sadly, the human race isn't quite ready for anonymous 'free speech' online as all it does is attract the shouty nutjobs and political shills. So lets park that concept, and try again in a few decades time.

EDIT: To clarify (and thanks to the responders for calling it out), I meant a real name policy on the verified account details only - it doesn't have to be visible to the masses.

---

[1] REAL verification for all, not the blue tick which is basically a vanity symbol these days.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#255

Post by FYYFFF » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:17 PM UTC

The value of Twitter is the amplification by media. It has very little actual traction in the whole, without the amplification its worthless to anyone but narcissist and PR folk.

One solution is to charge users $1 to tweet. Charge users with over 10k followers 1k a month per 10k to Tweet to their followers.

Its a PR machine, not a news source. Treat it like one and its value will both rise and fall...

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#256

Post by Starlevel001 » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:17 PM UTC

MarcScott wrote: post #178

Am I the only person here that finds Twitter a nice place? I'm careful about who I follow, most of whom are tech people or educators. My feed is a really nice place to go, and I can't remember the last time I read or saw anything that triggered me in the slightest. I'm seeing loads of comments about how toxic Twitter is, but isn't that on you? Don't follow or engage and the algorithm will skip you over.

The constant whining about Twitter on here makes more sense when you understand what the people here might be saying to solicit such a response.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#257

Post by mikepurvis » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:18 PM UTC

boredumb wrote: post #105

People act like this is some spiteful thing he's doing in order to just post edgy memes or have a 'private' social media for himself. Twitter, despite being a toxic place the majority of people avoid, brought in over 5 billion dollars last year. If elon removes bots, welcomes non-extremists back on, gets comedians and entertaining accounts back on board and lets people say what they want instead a bot army of shills…

> gets comedians and entertaining accounts back on board

IMO this is a lost cause— they're on Tiktok now, and it's in many ways a better platform for that type of content in terms of its ability to drive engagement and also deal with abuse.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#258

Post by dqpb » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:18 PM UTC

giarc wrote: post #147

Honest question, why can Elon, and only Elon solve the bot problem? Software devs have been trying to solve this problem since the beginning of the internet and yet bots still fill every space on the web.

Meta answer: the ultimate point of money is that it gives you the opportunity to make decisions without convincing everyone that you deserve to make decisions.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#259

Post by JohnWhigham » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:19 PM UTC

parenthesis wrote: post #79

I will become a Musk fanboi if he reverts twitter to allowing unlimited reading without being logged in.

This, holy shit. I only click on a Twitter post like once a month, but every time I have in recent months, I usually X right out of it because of the login prompts. I despise this walled garden bullshit.

Re: Twitter set to accept Musk's $43B offer – sources

#260

Post by root_axis » Mon, Apr 25, 2022, 2:19 PM UTC

WORMS_EAT_WORMS wrote: post #219

Whoever you are, whatever your politics and positions are, you have to admit and appreciate the humor in the saying: “it’s a private company, they can do what they want”. Full 180 and probably shouldn’t use an argument you don’t believe in to help make your point if you are on the receiving end of that joke. Just trying to enjoy the ride on by this one… I’m still much more concerned with the on-demand Ludovico Techni…

You're claiming there's a 180 but I don't see it. I haven't seen anyone arguing that Musk shouldn't be legally allowed to operate the site as he sees fit were he the owner.