[dead]
Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
91–100 of 109 posts
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#92[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#93[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#94[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#95[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#96[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you considered that maybe de-plaforming people on the fringe and forcing them into their own private silos actually ends up boosting their message? When you try to be the goody two-shoes and block anything and everything that could potentially be offensive to someone you just make controversial opinions more intriguing. At least I want to see what the big fuss was about and determine myself it such banishment wa…
I mean, it's worth _considering_, but it does not appear to be true. See reddit; reddit has gone through a number of waves of banning abominable subreddits. In general the result is that the most extreme members create a nightmarish reddit clone which no-one else cares about, the rest disperse.
How would you know when the very existence of these new silos is hidden from you?
This is like saying "our model recognizes 99% of the AI generated images", but it leave out that you don't know the actual amount since when your model does not recognize that an image in the wild was generated by AI you dont know that it was generated by an AI.
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#98[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#99[dead]
Re: Blue Sky: Can Twitter be owned by its users?
#100[dead]