81–90 of 102 posts
Not mentioning Mastodon (not even just to disparage it as not being worth further remarks) makes the article look blinkered. Threads is related to and interoperates with Mastodon; so Mastodon is relevant to an article in which Threads is the main topic.
Threads has far more integration with Instagram than with Mastodon, despite repeated promises to the contrary. If you want Mastodon, you should just do that and not Threads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you don't follow people, they don't show up in your feed. If you lurk on the firehose you get it all. Including all the parts you may disagree with or find despicable or... Perhaps also something nice? I really don't get this point... What do you expect exactly on a large platform?
that's not true? it you follow the "for you" feed you'll get shit Twitter "thinks" you'll like - ie shit that'll get youre attention
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Large (and small, and in between) corporations are abstractions, through which act actual people, whose rights are not diminished by that fact.
the only thing I concede is that there is a gray area, the in between, as you put it... but aside from that gray area in between, large corporations do not have rights. the end. I understand that libertarian logic uses gray areas as a means to an end of furthering their ideology, but that is not an issue for me.
Governments, as a condition of granting the privileges asscoiated with the corporate form, could specifically apply limits to its use (and should do so much more than they do, generally), but to the extent they haven't, people who control corporations don’t lose rights merely because they are acting through them.
Corporations don't have rights, because corporations don't actually exist. Corporations are treated as having rights, because they are simply vehicles for actions by natural persons, who have rights.
We don’t need social media, period. Social media is a fundamentally flawed model that you have can have human communication on a global scale with a “The Algorithm” used to cleanly order high quality capital-C “Content” into numeric categories that can be parceled out to drive capital-E “Engagement”. If you told people about this 30 years ago, they would have laughed at you, and not because of some garbage about peop…
Your comment is typical social media, with language that provokes extreme emotion ("period", "hate", "stupid", "going to shit").
You fit right in with what you feel outraged about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freedom of association - the right to tell someone to get off your lawn, or your website - is free speech too.
Yes, and it's restricted in the case of providers of infrastructure deemed essential to the operation of a civil society. Electricity and landline providers can't decline to serve either the KKK or the Black Panthers. Twitter, being the de facto modern public square, should soon be covered by this type of legislation.
[0]https://fr.crimethinc.com/2022/11/25/elon-musk-bans-crimethi...
We don’t need social media, period. Social media is a fundamentally flawed model that you have can have human communication on a global scale with a “The Algorithm” used to cleanly order high quality capital-C “Content” into numeric categories that can be parceled out to drive capital-E “Engagement”. If you told people about this 30 years ago, they would have laughed at you, and not because of some garbage about peop…
You are participating in a social media site, with "Show HN", "Ask HN", upvotes, downvotes, with appearance controlled by "The Algorithm", all of the hallmark of social media. Your comment is typical social media, with language that provokes extreme emotion ("period", "hate", "stupid", "going to shit"). You fit right in with what you feel outraged about.
See also this thread from yesterday, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37147914 "Thousands of scientists are cutting back from Twitter" Essentially, a survey published in Nature about twitter usage among scientists dropping, in part, because of the phenomena mentioned in this New Yorker article. Eg: "Žiga Malek, an environmental scientist at the Free University of Amsterdam, mentioned in the survey that he had sta…
If you don't follow people, they don't show up in your feed. If you lurk on the firehose you get it all. Including all the parts you may disagree with or find despicable or... Perhaps also something nice? I really don't get this point... What do you expect exactly on a large platform?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Freedom of association - the right to tell someone to get off your lawn, or your website - is free speech too.
Yes, and it's restricted in the case of providers of infrastructure deemed essential to the operation of a civil society. Electricity and landline providers can't decline to serve either the KKK or the Black Panthers. Twitter, being the de facto modern public square, should soon be covered by this type of legislation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. A few months after the takeover I blocked Twitter at the DNS level for my house. I went back into the office for work one day and in some down time, I went to Twitter while it wasn't DNS blocked. It's a ghost town. I miss the old Twitter, but that's clearly never coming back.
That's weird, because I'm seeing as much activity, engagement and interaction as I've always seen. There are a lot fewer insane takes being posted by accounts that may or may not be bots, but I'm not really missing that as they just derailed the conversation. I get the impression that more 'normal' people are now using the platform; the quality and ... coherence ... of replies has gone way up. Also happy to see a lot…
I’m glad that scientists such as Dr Robert Malone have been unbanned. I’m not an expert in his field so I cannot tell if he is a crazed paranoid lunatic, or if he is the most important whistleblower of the 21st century.
Either way, I want to hear him out and see his arguments judged by the wisdom of the crowds. While science converges on the truth, it SHOULD be messy and there should be disagreement with consensus views occasionally. When disagreement is silently removed, we’re not doing science anymore.
People needed a new twitter because they hate Elon, which is just another fad. They eventually learn to ignore his antics and just enjoy everyone else’s tweets. They always come back. Just check out Threads timing, it coincides with max Elon hate, can’t be more clear.
It’s how they signal tribal affiliation.