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

Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

help.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 790 posts

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#331

Post by smoldesu »

pjc50 wrote: post #222
strangattractor wrote: post #169

There is no money is promoting free speech or at least not the kind of money Twitter needs to pay back it's investors and creditors. There have been multiple poor business decisions since the buyout. The "burn it the ground and start over mentality" is effectively placing the company in a startup position. Given the risk of startups it would have likely been cheaper/smarter to start a new company than pursue a levera…

Destroying Twitter, or at least rendering it unusable by its current audience, is clearly the objective. I'm not entirely sure why but it seems to be to "own the libs". (edit: I have been pointed at the EU rules https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-... under which "gatekeeper platforms" may not "prevent consumers from linking up to businesses outside their platforms". However I expect Twitter t…

Destroying Twitter should be a liberal effort. It's frankly sickening to step back and consider how much influential public discourse took place on a private platform. If you're a classical liberal, implementing protocols like ActivityPub is essential to promote competition across apps and platforms. Even if you're a conservative, it should be readily apparent how centralizing our communications power is a bad idea.

Whatever the case, it's clear that Twitter is beyond the pale now. Our only option is building a better world, there's no hope in putting the pieces back together like they used to be.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#332

Post by minimaxir »

photochemsyn wrote: post #246
highwaylights wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter is competing for Parler’s audience now. This is just accelerating that process along.

I think the actual internal business model is motivated more by the desire to capture the Tik-Tok audience than the Parler audience - it's much larger. However, it is true that from a purely business viewpoint, you'd want a platform that was equally popular with left-Democrats, right-Republicans, and unaffiliated-independents.

> desire to capture the Tik-Tok audience

The TikTok audience is the one that would also refuse to use Twitter specifically because of Elon.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#333

Post by [deleted] »

grepLeigh wrote: post #257

Influencers cross-promote their social channels all the time, since each social media network has a different audience. An influencer might post how-to videos on TikTok, re-post to YouTube shorts, then re-purpose the same content as a micro-blog threads on Twitter. There's even a cottage industry of link tree / bio landing pages that consolidate all of your social handles, featured posts, etc into one page. Are those…

[deleted]

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#334

Post by wfaler »

tlogan wrote: post #117
ClumsyPilot wrote: post #36

Ah damn, I hoped for a fair experiment to demonstrate absordity of total free speech, but istead we got bog standard hypocracy! Boo! If you are caught wondering why some people still support Elon - in 'true conservative' society, like Russia or Saudi states, hypocracy is means of demonstrating hierarchy. So as a leader, you show that you are dominant by demonstrating that rules don't apply to you. That makes you even…

I genuinely believed that he would try to allow more free speech on Twitter. There was a small chance that the experiment will succeed. I guess he never wanted that: he just lied. But why?

Not sure he lied. I think he fooled himself into thinking that moderating a social media platform can be done on a rose-tinted ideological basis. Then reality hit, and the fact is, there are so many edge-cases that being ideologically consistent is almost impossible.

Moderation is hard. And it matters, both to keep audiences & advertisers. Besides, First Amendment-based moderation is not even possible for an international company. Most of Europe have strict laws on holocaust-denial. Thailand & the UK have laws banning speech offensive to their royal families.

..etc, etc..

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#335

Post by richbell »

jacquesm wrote: post #276
richbell wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's breaking my heart to see Gitlab's recent behaviour (e.g., deleting old projects, removing sensible pricing options). I want to give them my money but no longer can because of how prohibitively expensive it is for me to buy the features I'd want. It's clear they're struggling to compete with a post-acquisition GitHub that effectively has infinite budget from Microsoft.

Yes, and that's one more reason to stand by them. If they phase out the 'free' tier that I've been using for pianojacq.com I will be happy to pay.

Gitlab no doubt has some wonderful people, but out-of-touch behaviour and scorning your most loyal user base tends to point to bad leadership. It's very difficult to course-correct bad leadership without somehow removing them — just look at Mozilla.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#339

Post by pjc50 »

jlundberg wrote: post #239
kristianc wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s been some speculation he is trying to build an Everything app a-la WeChat in China. Aside from the fact that the everything app concept has never really worked outside China, and certainly won’t fly with the EU — he probably would have been better starting it from zero. I’m pretty sure if he could have got out of the Twitter acquisition he would have.

And not only speculation, he tweeted this in October 2022: ”Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app”

At this rate it'll be the nothing app.

Re: Promotion of alternative social platforms policy

#340

Post by jacquesm »

Vaslo wrote: post #167
m4lvin wrote: post #24

Note that Mastodon is third in the list. I consider that a success. 1. They ignore you. 2. They laugh at you. 3. They fight you. <<<--- we are here. 4. You win.

No one outside of tech nerds or PR departments is going to get seriously into Mastodon. My wife and her lib/moderate friends checked it out and went right back to Twitter. Too confusing, one husband was banned from one instance and caused issues getting onto others, hard to understand why.

Mastodon has moved well beyond where I thought it would in spite of having some pretty glaring shortcomings. If they fix those it will explode.

A 'Mastondoninabox' distribution would be a very nice starting point.

Post reply on HN