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

Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

blog.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 504 posts

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#451

Post by solarkraft »

sayrer wrote: post #383
throwawaymaths wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're also problematic because you'll likely optimize for whatever metric you pick with no regard to the ethics of the optimization. Sometimes a double blind test is not the right thing to do.

I've never really bought this argument. There might be unethical growth hackers in the company, but A/B tests are not the problem in that situation. In my experience, they mostly just catch bugs. Stuff like "hmm, our much better looking signup flow underperforms... oh, the form is broken on Safari." That kind of thing.

Think of the AI optimizing for a stated goal while ignoring implied constraints (e.g. eradicating humanity to stop wars).

This can be the case for A/B testing. Sure, you can increase ad clicks by 30% ... if you trick the user into clicking it through a carefully timed layout jump.

I think GP's argumentation may go in this direction. I'd probably not say A/B testing is the problem itself, it is a tool after all, but I could imagine it's sometimes not used very well.

Another point: Spotify's core flow changes so much (feels like almost daily) that I've lost all confidence in using it.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#452

Post by [deleted] »

themacguffinman wrote: post #402
yreg wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's curious how many people are unhappy that someone choses to pay for an early-access product that's in beta.

Maybe because it's unsafe and misleading? The US Department of Justice has already started a criminal investigation [1]: > Oct 25 - Tesla Inc (TSLA.O) is under criminal investigation in the United States over claims that the company's electric vehicles can drive themselves, three people familiar with the matter said. > The U.S. Department of Justice launched the previously undisclosed probe last year following more t…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#454

Post by unconed »

linasj wrote: post #247
MangoCoffee wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter cutting down the bloat and going start up mode is probably the best thing. Twitter before Musk isn't any better than after Musk.

Twitter after musk is welcoming misinformation https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-63796832 - this means worse.

Don't be ridiculous.

Claims that were classified as COVID misinformation include:

- surgical masks don't work against aerosol viruses

- lockdowns and curfews will not stop covid

- natural immunity due to prior infection is more effective

- mRNA shots don't stop transmission

- mRNA shots don't stop infection

- mRNA shots cause myocarditis

One by one these have been revealed as true, with naysayers looking like ass-covering idiots, or worse, paid shills for big pharma.

If at this point you still have any faith left in the biomedical establishment, the one who doesn't belong on Twitter is you, because you will hysterically fall for the next big thing just the same.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#455

Post by phpisthebest »

yosame wrote: post #449
phpisthebest wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it is good thing for you all major platforms have the ablity to block, mute, or otherwise curate your experience, including sharing "block lists" and other innovations so your personal experience is what you make it to be I support giving people the power to create their own echo chambers and safe spaces, feel free to do so.. No one should be forced to communicate with anyone they do not want to, however you als…

> "Sticks and Stones my break my bones but words will never harm me" Emotions are real, and emotional pain is real. Of course words can hurt you, they evoke emotions.

Emotions are real, but is it not the public responsibility to manage your emotions. Each person, solely, is responsible for their own emotions. If "emotional harm" becomes the basis for what speech is allowed and what is not then we cease to have a culture of free expression

“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what." -- Stephen Fry

You can not have free expression if the only thing required to shut down that expression is to claim emotional harm. I did not respect that position when it was the Christian right claim harms if gays spoke nor do I today when the authoritarian left claims emotional harm over the wrong pronouns

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#456

Post by torginus »

ilyt wrote: post #346
CrypticShift wrote: post #11

> 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.

Isn't that how regular internet forums work?

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#457

Post by torginus »

CrypticShift wrote: post #11

> 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 don't understand why people put an equals sign between less moderation and the inevitable fall of the platform to trolls?

I feel HN is not that moderated - bar - I don't feel like it happens that often that people's opinions get disappeared - Imo the main appeal of the site is that people of differing opinions are and worldviews are able to have informed debates about stuff here - even if limited to the world of technology.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#458

Post by p0pcult »

AustinDev wrote: post #352
p0pcult wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As would not taking cues from right wing fever dream peddlers.

Of course, but the whole situation is implausible on its face. It doesn't have to be a right-wing conspiracy.

Guy with severe mental health issues

[checks notes]

in an era when the former president led an uprising--one which actually broke into the capitol building--to stay in power and

[checks notes]

breaks into the house of the

[checks notes]

super-vilified(1) speaker of the house, and--fining only Paul Pelosi there--attacks him.

Yes, implausible on the face of it. Of course. How could this happen?

(1) https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/30/us/politics/pelosi-attack...

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#459

Post by rchaud »

monero-xmr wrote: post #18

First Twitter was going to crash in a week, then it was everyone would flee to Mastodon, now it’s that all the advertisers would leave. Maybe Twitter really didn’t need 7500 people, and maybe having more voices speak is a good thing (there is always block button), and maybe advertisers won’t flee forever. That seems more likely to me than Twitter imploding.

Twitter definitely took measures to prevent network outages. I can go through my timeline within 10 minutes; after that, I'm seeing posts from the day before. This was impossible pre-Musk; the timeline just went on forever.

AFAIK, most of the people I follow are still tweeting; I just don't see as many now.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#460

Post by rchaud »

ozten wrote: post #411
monero-xmr wrote: post #18

First Twitter was going to crash in a week, then it was everyone would flee to Mastodon, now it’s that all the advertisers would leave. Maybe Twitter really didn’t need 7500 people, and maybe having more voices speak is a good thing (there is always block button), and maybe advertisers won’t flee forever. That seems more likely to me than Twitter imploding.

I've dipped into Twitter trending topics a couple times in the last week. Each day it was 100% Alt right, Crypto, an error (like a sentence fragment), or world cup news for top 20 topics. That looks like a disaster to me. If Twitter was a new app just launched, I would think it was a seriously sketchy back alley and not a town square.

Twitter is still OK for users that have been there for a while and built up a network of good accounts to follow. It's probably a much worse experience for brand-new users.
Post reply on HN