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

741–750 of 1001 posts

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

#741

Post by dillondoyle »

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…

Does local = national? what about conflicts legally - or ethically as a US corp. China access using CCP rules. Russia too.

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

#743

Post by hk__2 »

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…

> Optional verification check marks for anyone who wants them. Throw out the Blue Check status symbol

Those are not mutually exclusive. I may be interested to know that @emmanuelmacron and @emmanuel_macron are both real persons but I’d also want to know that @emmanuelmacron is the famous one while the other is just an homonyme. Blue Check symbols are also a lot useful to distinguish real brand accounts from fake ones.

> Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out.

See @yishan’s thread on moderation [1]. Moderation is a hard issue, "consistent moderation" is not achievable because the hardest decisions are made based on the personal feeling of the moderators (that’s also why FB has tons of humans moderators: you can’t just automate it beside obvious spam content). You can’t have rules for everything and you will ALWAYS have people whose behavior match the 'rules' but are still problematic. I guess that to have a good opinion about moderation you must work as a moderator for some time.

[1]: https://twitter.com/yishan/status/1514938507407421440

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

#744

Post by qwertox »

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…

- Let the main feed be the main feed and not some attempt to recommend 4 new persons/things to subscribe to after every 2 tweets.

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

#745

Post by [deleted] »

shrimpx wrote: post #698

What’s the consequence for employees? People with 3 years left of vesting RSUs. Will those keep vesting somehow? Or they’ll get an upfront payout? And what’s my incentive to work for an established private company with no stock growth prospect? I guess Twitter will have to pay 500k senior eng. salaries in cash instead of stock?

[deleted]

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

#747

Post by runako »

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…

- Transparent and consistent moderation policies. Bans are inconsistently applied for reasons that are often hard to figure out.

This is one of those things that sounds great in theory. But in reality, it likely functions much more like any other adjudication system. People can break rules an infinite number of ways, so there are an infinite number of reasons to ban an account. Understanding many of them will require context that may be problematic to share (for ex: if it happens in DMs). So in practice, the shorthand public reason for bans will pretty much always reduce to "violated site policies."

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

#748

Post by MetaWhirledPeas »

fleddr wrote: post #708

I'm optimistic from a nihilistic point of view: for Twitter the only way is up, and yet even a complete failure would be a net improvement to the world. There's a laundry list of uncontroversial improvements he can make to the product itself. Twitter as a product is broken in so many ways. Musk is the kind of outcome-driven character to get things done. And it will be done in a way that does not directly conflict wit…

> Twitter as a product is broken in so many ways.

I'm genuinely curious: how so? I'm all for the idea of aligning moderation with the law of the land, but to be honest I'm not in-the-loop enough to know what people are upset about in the first place, except banning Trump I guess?

I can see how the Twitter UI kinda sucks in some ways, but it gets the job done. I'm fairly new to Twitter, and I'm pretty impressed at the level of participation from well-known individuals, and I'm also impressed with the ability to sniff out breaking news.

If the "broken" part of Twitter is people arguing all the time, how is that different from other corners of the internet?

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

#749

Post by FL410 »

hk__2 wrote: post #743
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…

> Optional verification check marks for anyone who wants them. Throw out the Blue Check status symbol Those are not mutually exclusive. I may be interested to know that @emmanuelmacron and @emmanuel_macron are both real persons but I’d also want to know that @emmanuelmacron is the famous one while the other is just an homonyme. Blue Check symbols are also a lot useful to distinguish real brand accounts from fake ones…

> Those are not mutually exclusive. I may be interested to know that @emmanuelmacron and @emmanuel_macron are both real persons but I’d also want to know that @emmanuelmacron is the famous one while the other is just an homonyme. Blue Check symbols are also a lot useful to distinguish real brand accounts from fake ones.

Sounds like one to verify identity, one to verify a "position"

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

#750

Post by null_shift »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #729

Could twitter allow real people to stay anonymous? As AI generated content approaches 100% of internet content over the next decade (gtp-powered bots, russian troll farms, etc), it will be good to have human verification… If, after human verification, twitter can implement a zero-trust software means to allow those humans to post anonymously to protect certain dialogue… that would be great.

why do you need zero trust software for this?

everything else is already being handled by a centralized authority (twitter), why not let them also handle letting users post anonymously after having been verified?

Post reply on HN