[flagged]
[deleted]
We don’t need a new Twitter
21–30 of 102 posts
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#22[flagged]
>> A global platform is too difficult for governments to control
How is that? I claim the opposite. It's far easier to control onr entity instead of multiple separated ones.
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#23[flagged]
As a long-time enjoyer and early promoter of social media, I disagree with your translation.
The real problem is that either due to algorithms or some inherent quirk of human nature, global public social media has become awful. Let me characterize the awfulness with a joke that showcases the vibe shift.
You tweet/post: “I love sandwiches”
2009 twitter: “Omg I too love sandwiches! Let’s be friends, follow me back”
2023 twitter: “How dare you speak against my brethren who cannot eat gluten!?!? You are an awful human being and I hope you rot in hell.”
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#24Wow if I didn’t use the app every day I’d stay totally clear of it after reading these quotes right from the beginning of the article. This really doesn’t represent my experience at all. Am I alone or has the experience actually improved? I don’t follow people who are toxic because I don’t enjoy their content. It’s mostly software engineers and the #buildinpublic community and it’s a beautiful place with them. What h…
You've said it "improved" and "gotten better" without naming a single concrete thing that's better than before?
Here, I'll name three that have gotten noticeably worse:
1. Under any viral tweet I have to scroll through the sea of Twitter Blue subscribers with >1000 followers to reach some sane reply (as in not a one word reply, @reply_to_this_ai_bot, @save_to_this_random_tool, a crylaugh emoji).
2. Monetization depends on impressions, incentivizing ragebait that other people will "dunk on". Correcting someone gives money to the person you're correcting, which is insane to say the least.
3. API is dead, but bots are literally everywhere. And they're the stupidest kind of bots on top of that. "Contact @soandso on Insta and he'll get your account back", there's a shitcoin trending literally every day, and so on.
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#25Haven’t we seen the same public discourse time and time again? A lot of people left FB half a decade ago, before that it was something else. I suspect we’ll keep seeing the same thing again. People want to be consumed by social network probably to their own detriment
Michael Goldharber said it best - people have limited attention to give anything, but unlimited capacity to receive attention. Exploitation of that inequality keeps the Attention Economy afloat.
Its also why HN stays afloat, even though the architecture ensures the amount of content consumed is a small insignificant fraction of the content produced.
Ideally we track content consumed/content produced gives us a ratio of the information waste an architecture is producing. And all these architectures are producing a whole lot of waste.
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#26See also this thread from yesterday, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37147914 "Thousands of scientists are cutting back from Twitter" Essentially, a survey published in Nature about twitter usage among scientists dropping, in part, because of the phenomena mentioned in this New Yorker article. Eg: "Žiga Malek, an environmental scientist at the Free University of Amsterdam, mentioned in the survey that he had sta…
[flagged]
Scientists are on average a little left-leaning but science denialism, somehow, is something that crops up in both far-left and far-right spaces (just not equally). If you were in a leftist bubble, you’d have been seeing science denialism for a while now. Far-left science denialism starts with the “only use natural products, chemicals are bad for you, vaccines are bad for you” crunchy lifestyle accounts.
Sometimes I think the political spectrum is more of an S1 topology.
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#27What if I want a platform without open antisemitism (or any for that matter), and that doesn't promote emotionally charged content as much?
Move to Mastodon.
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#28[flagged]
How is Cal Newport fascist? I have always known him as the "deep work"/how to focus guy.
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#29See also this thread from yesterday, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37147914 "Thousands of scientists are cutting back from Twitter" Essentially, a survey published in Nature about twitter usage among scientists dropping, in part, because of the phenomena mentioned in this New Yorker article. Eg: "Žiga Malek, an environmental scientist at the Free University of Amsterdam, mentioned in the survey that he had sta…
[flagged]
You know you can type the real words right? There's no conspiracy. Echo Chamber. See. I'm still here I didn't get smi-
Re: We don’t need a new Twitter
#30See also this thread from yesterday, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37147914 "Thousands of scientists are cutting back from Twitter" Essentially, a survey published in Nature about twitter usage among scientists dropping, in part, because of the phenomena mentioned in this New Yorker article. Eg: "Žiga Malek, an environmental scientist at the Free University of Amsterdam, mentioned in the survey that he had sta…
[flagged]
who says that the scientist is leftist?