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

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 1001 posts

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

#681

Post by guerrilla »

pastor_bob wrote: post #640
abnry wrote: post #631

Ways I think Twitter could immediately improve, from the perspective of users: - Optional verification check marks for anyone who wants them. Throw out the Blue Check status symbol. Offer "real person" twitter filter. - Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out. - Return to a reverse chronological time and/or down selection of rage-ba…

I personally would love to see how many people a person has Blocked, similar to Following/Followers number. would find it very informative about a tweeter

So you can judge how much they are harassed? Why would you care?

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

#682

Post by crisdux »

Lendal wrote: post #649
abnry wrote: post #631

Ways I think Twitter could immediately improve, from the perspective of users: - Optional verification check marks for anyone who wants them. Throw out the Blue Check status symbol. Offer "real person" twitter filter. - Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out. - Return to a reverse chronological time and/or down selection of rage-ba…

Interesting. So dark money can remain secret, but on Twitter you'll be forced to doc yourself to prove you're human. I don't see how that's improved anything.

I envision they would implement a strategy that strengthens digital identity while not affecting those who wish to stay anonymous. Basically they would grant digital identity to those who want it, with that would come additional digital rights. Twitter could contribute a lot to this space.

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

#683

Post by syshum »

abnry wrote: post #631

Ways I think Twitter could immediately improve, from the perspective of users: - Optional verification check marks for anyone who wants them. Throw out the Blue Check status symbol. Offer "real person" twitter filter. - Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out. - Return to a reverse chronological time and/or down selection of rage-ba…

I have never understood this aversion to Anonymous Speech, free speech requires Anonymous Speech. Some of the most important events in history (like the Founding of the United States) would never have happened with out Anonymous Speech.

We should debate idea's not authors. Anonymous Speech enables idea's to be spread not personality cults, one would thing those opposing Elon believing that people just support him because of his personality and fame would want more Anonymous Speech not less

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

#684

Post by ar_lan »

pastor_bob wrote: post #640
abnry wrote: post #631

Ways I think Twitter could immediately improve, from the perspective of users: - Optional verification check marks for anyone who wants them. Throw out the Blue Check status symbol. Offer "real person" twitter filter. - Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out. - Return to a reverse chronological time and/or down selection of rage-ba…

I personally would love to see how many people a person has Blocked, similar to Following/Followers number. would find it very informative about a tweeter

I have been blocked by so many people solely because of people I follow - many of whom I don't follow because I like them, but they have an effect on broader communities and it's good to keep tabs on them.

There are notable actors/actresses who've blocked me because of this. It just immediately makes me dislike anything they are in because I just can't think of them as a person worth respecting.

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

#687

Post by VirusNewbie »

javajosh wrote: post #309

I've always wanted a feature that just bins similar reactions together, so I don't have to read them. For example, I'd love replies to be binned into categories like "cruel disparagement", "wilful misunderstanding", "mindless agreement", "fallacious", "opinion as fact", and "threats and doxing". Ideally the last category would be taken seriously by law enforcement. People who write things who get binned into these ca…

Fantastic idea. Probably doable as well.

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

#689

Post by dragonwriter »

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.

> Honest question, why can Elon, and only Elon solve the bot problem?

He can't and he is unlikely to want to.

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

#690

Post by gameman144 »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #612
altacc wrote: post #41

He's already said that he'd follow all local laws so it would be interesting to see if he can find the elusive path of maintaining free speech, following the law and not having Twitter being a toxic cesspool used mainly to shout down those not our your "side". Personally my reservations are because I think running a social media site is a lot about understanding people and defining a healthy culture for your elusive…

> interesting to see if he can find the elusive path of maintaining free speech I am also utterly gobsmacked how people here jump to the defense of billionaires. > Taking a moment to think about how utterly crazy it is that in 2022 a company with a significant dataset of private and public communications, that has municipalities, companies and governments on the platform, can switch ownership with pretty much zero sc…

I mean, if we aren't okay with this dataset existing under new ownership, why were we okay with it existing under the previous ownership?

If this dataset is dangerous, regulation is the way to solve that, not relying on the benevolence of corporate boards and shareholders.

Post reply on HN