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

Bye, Twitter

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 203 posts

Re: Bye, Twitter

#171

Post by haunter »

rsynnott wrote: post #155
MikusR wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter feed has only the people you follow.

I just opened up Twitter, and it is shoving some inane Musk tweet in my face. I certainly don't follow Elon, but some of the people I follow do, and that's good enough for Twitter (actually, it goes a bit further; it will on occasion show you things from people who none of your followers follow either, if they're 'trending').

It only shows tweets that you follow if you opt-in that. Top right corner > change away from Home, don't show top tweets https://i.imgur.com/wl91ONj.png

Re: Bye, Twitter

#172

Post by Kye »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #80
dorkwood wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it depends on what your end goal is. For example, I've disabled news notifications on my phone. I used to get pinged multiple times per day to be told that either someone had died in an accident, or was raped and murdered, or some other such thing. One might argue that I'm sticking my head in the sand and 'living in a bubble' by turning these off. But while I think it's beneficial to expose myself to ideas…

I'm only referring to those who build these complete echo chambers on social media. For relatively mentally stable adults it's good to know about and consider dissenting opinions, especially so if you publish your own opinions, like the author. I completely agree that a bit of head-in-the-sand can be quite good for mental health and happiness.

Your faulty assumption is that social media is someone's only input. Why can't I have a nice little oasis to chill at between battles for my right to live?

Re: Bye, Twitter

#173

Post by davidmurdoch »

Kye wrote: post #172
davidmurdoch wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm only referring to those who build these complete echo chambers on social media. For relatively mentally stable adults it's good to know about and consider dissenting opinions, especially so if you publish your own opinions, like the author. I completely agree that a bit of head-in-the-sand can be quite good for mental health and happiness.

Your faulty assumption is that social media is someone's only input. Why can't I have a nice little oasis to chill at between battles for my right to live?

Social media is probably the broadest input most people can get.

Re: Bye, Twitter

#174

Post by davidmurdoch »

zimpenfish wrote: post #168
davidmurdoch wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm only referring to those who build these complete echo chambers on social media. For relatively mentally stable adults it's good to know about and consider dissenting opinions, especially so if you publish your own opinions, like the author. I completely agree that a bit of head-in-the-sand can be quite good for mental health and happiness.

> it's good to know about and consider dissenting opinions There's dissenting opinions like "I like team A" vs "I like team B" and then there's dissenting opinions like "I think LGBTQ+ people should have rights" vs "I think LGBTQ+ people should be rounded up / banned from public / have no rights".

Not exactly fair in the extremism on both sides.

If you don't know about or consider alternate viewpoints could you really have productive discourse with a person that aligns with those viewpoints?

Most people that you'd meet or talk to that may disagree on LGBTQ aren't extremist, they are more along the lines of "a children's cartoon about dinosaurs shouldn't have multiple lesbian make out scenes" or "Disney is indoctrinating children", or "just because I wouldn't date someone of the opposite sex doesn't make me homophobic".

Re: Bye, Twitter

#175

Post by Kye »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #173
Kye wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your faulty assumption is that social media is someone's only input. Why can't I have a nice little oasis to chill at between battles for my right to live?

Social media is probably the broadest input most people can get.

Shallow exposure to other experiences never told me much. People hold back out of fear of harassment in a place as public and algorithmically tuned toward creating negative experiences as Twitter. Mastodon and the fediverse improve on that slightly by not having the algorithm, but there's still harassment.

I certainly don't reveal my whole self on social media. I open up a bit more in places with good moderation like this, or places where I control the comments like my blog.

Re: Bye, Twitter

#176

Post by [deleted] »

davidmurdoch wrote: post #174
zimpenfish wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's good to know about and consider dissenting opinions There's dissenting opinions like "I like team A" vs "I like team B" and then there's dissenting opinions like "I think LGBTQ+ people should have rights" vs "I think LGBTQ+ people should be rounded up / banned from public / have no rights".

Not exactly fair in the extremism on both sides. If you don't know about or consider alternate viewpoints could you really have productive discourse with a person that aligns with those viewpoints? Most people that you'd meet or talk to that may disagree on LGBTQ aren't extremist, they are more along the lines of "a children's cartoon about dinosaurs shouldn't have multiple lesbian make out scenes" or "Disney is indo…

[deleted]

Re: Bye, Twitter

#177

Post by dorkwood »

haunter wrote: post #170
dorkwood wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That hasn't been true for a while. I regularly see tweets by people who have no connection to the accounts I follow. They'll often have accompanying tags like "Sports" or "Cryptocurrency" above their name, as if Twitter has decided I'm interested in these topics.

It only shows tweets that you follow if you opt-in that. Top right corner > change away from Home, don't show top tweets https://i.imgur.com/wl91ONj.png

Yeah I've tried the chronological timeline but it always seemed to switch back to the algorithmic one. To be fair, I haven't tried it in a while. Are you saying things like 'follow topic' suggestions don't show up at all on the chronological timeline? I'll need to test this.

Re: Bye, Twitter

#179

Post by stale2002 »

theGnuMe wrote: post #157
taolegal wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Do you have evidence of that? If so what is it? And what is the source and quality of that evidence?

Well one piece of evidence is apparently you yourself think that dissenting opinions are going to become super popular just by not censoring then.

If the mainstream news was so great right now, then you wouldn't have to worry about dissenting opinions being said, and apparently mind controlling everyone or something.

Re: Bye, Twitter

#180

Post by haunter »

dorkwood wrote: post #177
haunter wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It only shows tweets that you follow if you opt-in that. Top right corner > change away from Home, don't show top tweets https://i.imgur.com/wl91ONj.png

Yeah I've tried the chronological timeline but it always seemed to switch back to the algorithmic one. To be fair, I haven't tried it in a while. Are you saying things like 'follow topic' suggestions don't show up at all on the chronological timeline? I'll need to test this.

>Are you saying things like 'follow topic' suggestions don't show up at all on the chronological timeline

Nope nothing like that. There are promoted tweets (that adblockers can actually block) but that's all. The whole thing is just one chronological timeline for me only showing people I folliow

Post reply on HN