A lot of the dogpiling here is sensationalism fueled by the media. People have a very short fuse to comment and won’t bother doing research, or consider alternative viewpoints. It’s either left or right wing - and that sort of thing is blatant indoctrination into an incredibly narrow Overton window that did not come from within someone’s mind. It was put there, through constant reinforcement and propaganda.
Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
341–350 of 504 posts
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#342Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they are referring to Elon's recent unhinged polls as testing.
Hey: vox populi, vox dei! It's Latin so it must be smart. Apparently Twitter had some huge problem with bots when Musk was trying to get out of the purchase. Thankfully he solved the bot problem after the purchase so he could run polls and really get the will of the people and not, you know, all those previously problematic bots.
Except when a poll gets a lot of votes that he doesn’t like, in which case he says “looks like the bots are out in force today!”
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#343Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, he said "more than meets the eye" because of contradicting news reports in the medias early on when the story broke, with many unknowns and incoherencies remaining today. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/miguel-almaguer-remains...
Body cam footage even censored would do a lot to sort out the unknowns and incoherencies. Sadly, we'll never see that out of SFPD
As would not taking cues from right wing fever dream peddlers.
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#344Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's just referencing the fact that the new Twitter is more open and transparent. I can't believe how many people are spinning this as a bad thing. We heard almost nothing from Parag and little from Jack when he was running it and experiments were opaque from the outside. Now we're hearing from the CEO and employees like George Hotz about what they are doing and planning, and they're involving the community, asking f…
> previous Twitter wasn't as transparent as it is now Reinstating accounts on the basis of a poll, on a platform you have spent months railing for having too many bots, is a good example of CYA transparency.
And are all the bots expected to vote one way?
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#345Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that different from Tesla essentially using Tesla car owners as unpaid betatesters for their autonomous driving (and other) software while disclaiming all responsibility when anything happens? This "learn by doing" is going to end up well ... not. Especially when trying to learn by repeating mistakes with completely foreseable consequences, like that blue "verified" badge being available for anyone who pays wi…
> using Tesla car owners as unpaid betatesters Almost right. Charging Tesla owners to beta test their autonomous driving software.
It's curious how many people are unhappy that someone choses to pay for an early-access product that's in beta.
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#346> What has changed, however, is our approach to experimentation including I suppose Elon's experimental approach to management. I hope that in 10 years, we will look back at this twitter 2.0 (= musk's debacle) as the impetus that lead to more widespread adoption of social media 2.0 (= federation) I already see the snowball effect getting momentum with all this coverage (NPR, NYT...) and big name exits (Apple...)
I think calling Mastodon and friends "federation" is too generous, "fiefdoms" fits much better, each with king/admin (not actual users) deciding what's allowed and what is banned.
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#347Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#348I think he'll make it. Not only does it look like Twitter will survive (if the mass-migration to another platform hasn't happened yet, when will it? If the site runs stable after the initial shock, why would it run less stable later?), it just might make Musk more powerful than we could ever imagine. Contrasting with other social media founders/owners he isn't shy to use the platform as a very personal thing, to acti…
> I think he'll make it. On what basis? Elon needs cash flow to pay the loans he took to buy Twitter. Banks don’t give a shit about politics, or mission, or popularity. Banks care about cash flow. Fact: advertisers (read: cash flow) are leaving Twitter. How will Elon pay off his loans?
It seems that he has about $200 Billion left, so I wouldn't worry too much about loans.
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#349If I had the time and resources, I would build a Twitter clone and focus on just getting journalists, editors, reporters, etc on the platform. This is a powerful community that is quite established on Twitter, but I suspect they would be willing to migrate. Maybe something like, Manuscript Wishlist or QueryTracker, but specifically with a Twitter vibe.
If you had your own twitter clone, what rule/process would you use for determining whether someone is a journalist/editor/reporter? Who should get the 'press' credential?
So many people do only editorialism but call themselves journalists. Journalists who do great investigatory pieces are often independent or bounce between publications frequently. Lots of influencers posing at journalists to obtain a veneer of legitimacy. More money than ever influencing the content of what is being written about. Lots of uncredentialed civilians tweeting newsworthy things. Lots of 'news' services writing articles entirely sourced via tweet.
I think the journalism industry is so blurry and chaotic right now, it's hard to know who is worthy of platforming.
Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation
#350TLDR: this post is entirely to calm advertisers, it can be boiled down to "don't worry, we still prioritize brand safety like before". It does have this gem in it: "What has changed, however, is our approach to experimentation. As you’ve seen over the past several weeks, Twitter is embracing public testing. We believe that this open and transparent approach to innovation is healthy, as it enables us to move faster an…
The thing is Twitter already A/B tested a LOT and Twitter’s new owner is naive to those prior findings as well as the long-term effects of them. Any advertiser is going to want to know about attrition rates, and those were previously best reported through now-fired employees as well as earnings releases. This is Twitter’s new owner learning the hard way that there are dumb advertisers out there who do want quick lift but longer term he’ll retain only spam. No way Twitter ever gets better than Doubleclick now.