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

461–470 of 504 posts

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

#461

Post by namkt »

pschuegr wrote: post #179
memish wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you don't know what he's doing doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's doing. That's a common error in logic. You'll also have to ignore that he's built companies that land rockets back on Earth and produce millions of EVs. He's objectively demonstrated ability.

Another common error in logic is assuming that building rockets and building communities require the same kinds of skills.

He also built the company, not the rockets. In a different thread here on HN, some of the SpaceX guys were commenting how he actually had very little understanding of rockets, understandably. But the credit goes to him regardless.

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

#462

Post by ladyattis »

andreyk wrote: post #12

TLDR: 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…

It's kind of hard to calm your advertisers when the boss has basically cut most of the marketing staff responsible for keeping contact with them. That's been the biggest issue so far, aside from the right-wing favoritism that the boss (Musk) has online (he's banned Crimethinc on a whim of Andy Ngo's hearsay). Basically, I wouldn't bother advertising on Twitter since the new boss/owner has no one to filter his nonsense out of the daily decision making. It's one thing to spew platitudes for free speech and it's another to actually lay out the rules of free speech on the platform (i.e. trying not to trigger regulations or reprisals of big govt agencies).

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

#463

Post by phpisthebest »

RonaldRaygun wrote: post #431
phpisthebest wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter has never been more fun, useful, and engaging for me. I signed up for an account after years of refusing to do so after elon took over

That's because you're a right wing troll, no? You're exactly the target demographic Musk is rolling out the red carpet for, so it stands to reason you're having a great time with it. This clearly doesn't refute the OP though. Will certainly be interesting to see if there are enough of y'all willing to shell out $8/mo to have your speech boosted above the free variety to make up for the lost ad spend of the Pinochet-h…

>That's because you're a right wing troll, no?

I am an independent libertarian that strongly believes in free expression, beyond the idea that only governments can censor people.

>>speech boosted above the free variety to make up for the lost ad spend

I think the reduced ad spend is temporary and in some ways unrelated to Musk whom they have used as an excuse to virtue signal for something they were already going to do in the first place

Also I think the plans are to expand twitters revenue model beyond Blue and ads so it will be more interesting what Elon plans to expand twitter into

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

#464

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

latchkey wrote: post #79

Our Trust & Safety team continues its diligent work to keep the platform safe from hateful conduct, abusive behavior, and any violation of Twitter's rules Should have prefixed that with "What is left of our trust & safety team..."

Has anyone shown actual data that proves Twitter has dropped the ball on this front, despite all the raging commentary about how many people have been let go or left?

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

#465

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

janoc wrote: post #57
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...)

It won't. Federation doesn't solve any of the problems Twitter now has. That instead of one poorly managed understaffed silo full of trolls and abusers you have 2000 poorly managed, even more understaffed systems with 2000 different approaches to moderation and content doesn't make anything easier or fixed for people who use Twitter today. It is the same like we had federated chat with Jabber for 20 years now - and n…

> That instead of one poorly managed understaffed silo full of trolls and abusers you have 2000 poorly managed, even more understaffed systems with 2000 different approaches to moderation and content doesn't make anything easier or fixed for people who use Twitter today.

But it would effectively kill the various cat-and-mouse gaming of the entire system by spammers, scammers, and sub-nation-state adversaries.

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

#466

Post by ta890134 »

I think liberals should take this as an opportunity to do a fact check on themselves. They are mostly right when they say they are loosing political terrain with Musk at Twitter.

I am m the opposite of a liberal, call it whatever you want. The Internet, media and corporate world is mostly always against my views. Guess what: I am still fine and believe it or not, despite two decades of massive liberal propaganda, my anti-liberal feelings are stronger than ever.

So if you are liberal you probably believe your side is the good one and can hold against facts, contradictions and fights. You should not be afraid of loosing some ground. If you are right, the stupid, opposite and wrong ideas of anti-liberals can't win. You are safe.

You seem to be afraid that allowing a bit of opposite speech will hurt your political stands. I would say: trust yourself, trust your beliefs and spread them intelligibly, and mostly, live by them.

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

#467

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

CameronNemo wrote: post #205
felipesoc wrote: post #88

> First, none of our policies have changed. Our approach to policy enforcement will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content: freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach. They recently unbanned many controversial accounts based solely on Twitter polls. Who do they expect will believe these statements?

And banned accounts when fringe far right "journalists" complained about them. https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...

> fringe far right "journalists"

I'm having a hard time thinking that anyone should be called a journalist -- without mocking quotes -- at this point. After the past couple of years of "reporting" about COVID, vaccines, protests, Ukraine, China, Twitter, etc., et. al., EVERYONE has taken positions at the "fringe."

For 20 years, I've made sense of the news by looking for the pieces of the puzzle where people agree. That is now literally impossible. There is ZERO overlap on ANY issue between the two sides now.

The few actual journalists remaining are known by name, and moving from newspapers to Substack.

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

#468

Post by malshe »

bombcar wrote: post #295
malshe wrote: post #285

Probably complete OT but is this correct grammatically? "First, none of our policies have changed." I think it should read "none of our policies has changed" instead. But I might be wrong as I get confused about this often.

The policies? None have changed. There are zero changed policies. If there was one policy changed, that would be the one that has changed. But there are none that have changed. And of those that haven't changed, any two haven't changed. Those all sound correct to me. Zero is plural.

Thanks! TIL

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

#469

Post by malshe »

jcranmer wrote: post #381
malshe wrote: post #285

Probably complete OT but is this correct grammatically? "First, none of our policies have changed." I think it should read "none of our policies has changed" instead. But I might be wrong as I get confused about this often.

In English, zero is grammatically plural. This isn't inherently true of all languages (that have a grammatical plural)--French, notably, treats zero as grammatically singular.

Thank you. Very interesting

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

#470

Post by staunch »

etchalon wrote: post #441
staunch wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really? Maybe Patreon or OnlyFans represent the best examples. But there weren't any real EV companies or private space companies before Elon Musk threw his hat in the ring. Whatever you think of him, he's clearly capable of doing things people previously believed to be impractical. Taking a first principles approach, there's no reason to believe that a social network used by the most influential companies, peopl…

The notion that the social network provides value on its own is … weird. Social networks are valuable because of users. They gain value by attracting large numbers of users. They have limited inherent value, and the majority have features which are easy enough for rivals to replicate.

The network is the value: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_effect

But what matters beyond the network is how well it can be utilized by users. That layer of tools and functionality on top of the network is where Twitter could charge users. Particularly power users and businesses that can justify spending some money on it because they get so much value or even generate revenue from it.

Post reply on HN