81–90 of 135 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Network effects are a perfectly sufficient explanation for why people don't use parler. Can you name one example where people switched from a bigger to a smaller network, because the bigger one allowed too much freedom of speech?
Why don't "free speech" networks ever grow to be the bigger one in the first place?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you give some examples of silencing his dissenters? Or where he has undermined democracy to make money? I'm genuinely curious if I've missed these, as I'm not familiar with any by my own recollection.
You mean other than the time where he harassed someone, called them a pedophile and hired a detective to investigate and try to dig up dirt on them because they got under his skin? That guy, who now has everything anyone has ever said in private messages on Twitter?
What’s with the sink?
As usual, Musk fails to be funny.
You’d think he could afford some good gag authors but that probably goes against his ego.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter is fundamentally different form and IRC channel. In an IRC channel, everyone sees every message, that's why moderation is necessary. On twitter, people themselves choose who to follow and block, they themselves moderate their own experience.
You could ignore people on IRC too, choose whether or not to join a particular channel or not, and choose which people to message in private. The problems I've run in to on it is that that some channels on IRC were run by powertripping assholes, and you'd get banned for disagreeing with them or having different opinions.... even if you were perfectly polite, didn't threaten or harass anyone, etc. Of course, you could…
This whole thing has been rather interesting to observe. I do wonder how the platform will change now that it's privately owned. I don't really care a lot about the platform itself, but it's influence on politics is very real. Personally I don't think this acquisition is healthy for a democracy, but nonetheless, it's something I want to observe. I've always thought these platforms need more democratic structures of g…
This whole thing has been rather interesting to observe. I do wonder how the platform will change now that it's privately owned. I don't really care a lot about the platform itself, but it's influence on politics is very real. Personally I don't think this acquisition is healthy for a democracy, but nonetheless, it's something I want to observe. I've always thought these platforms need more democratic structures of g…
Isn't he going to be bringing back people who were banned off the platform, that's more democratic. US has a bunch of problems but the one thing you used to get right is freedom of speech before big tech had so much influence, I thought the major purpose of Elon wanting to buy twitter was to uphold freedom of speech as it is written in the constitution, given it's something of a town square now.
Traditionally there was more friction to speech. I don't even mean just that the average person doesn't have access to a national platform like CNN. Even something like mailing out fliers had non-trivial costs. It's the same reason why junk mail is generally less of an issue than email spam.
In a traditional town square, people are not anonymous and the "square" was local enough for there to be social consequences to actions. On Twitter, many of the posters are anonymous and even those who aren't often live on the other side of the country.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The odds are that Twitter will probably be dead in a year. And that's based on what exactly? > He'll bring on a few yes-men executives that'll applaud him Again, based on what? Now here's a prediction actually based on Musk's past perf: He'll bring in people who get shit done, and get it done fast. Twitter will achieve things everyone says is stupid, ridiculous and impossible now as he's done in the past 20 years w…
That worked when Musk bought a functional company and added his brand of PR on top. Not for saving a company in trouble.
Which company would that be?
This whole thing has been rather interesting to observe. I do wonder how the platform will change now that it's privately owned. I don't really care a lot about the platform itself, but it's influence on politics is very real. Personally I don't think this acquisition is healthy for a democracy, but nonetheless, it's something I want to observe. I've always thought these platforms need more democratic structures of g…
How on earth can you think this is less democratic? It is by far more democratic. Twitter under previous leadership was on a banning, censoring, rampage against anything that didn’t agree with their own narrative.
A part of me is curious about what will happen next. And then there is a part of me, as a participant of whatever democracy is left in the United States, is concerned with what could happen if a particular user is allowed to use Twitter again after their orchestration of certain events.
I thought we were all about making it easier for felons to reintegrate into society? ;)