The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's the lesser of 2 evils. At least by having laws about what can and can't be posted, information is controlled by people we vote for on the understanding or hope they have the right intentions for our own good. Whether that is actually the case is a whole other point.

The alternative is to have the wild west of misinformation and things like Brexit happen.
 
Roar87 said:
I haven't said that "nothing should be highlighted", try and be honest with your posts or discussion becomes pointless. I think if something is misinformation then a community notes like solution is perfect. I don't think Twitter or any other platform should flat out delete things that they believe to be fake, because they can't and won't always be right, and they risk censoring things that are actually true. A good example would have been weapons of mass destruction, if Twitter were around in 2003 and someone said "there are no WMDs in Iraq", that post might have been removed as misinformation, yet later turn out to actually be correct. Do you understand why that's a danger, and also why allowing governments to decide what citizens can say is dangerous? Or do you just think we should give up our basic rights to free expression because someone can make a deep fake of Joe Biden or Donald Trump?
Click to expand...


The WMD example doesn't work, no one knew if he did or didn't have them in 2003. We absolutely knew he had had them, that is undisputed. So it was just a best guess from conflicting information as to whether he had destroyed them all or still had some.

Roar87 said:
No, obviously, I don't want any government to tell me what is true or false. I want zero regulation of information. If you dislike what you consider misinformation then spread better information, be so clear and spectacular with your facts that it can be indisputable. If you give politicians the power to classify and ban information then it will be abused.
Click to expand...

You said here you don't want governments to regulate social media companies and that misinformation should just be left to circulate and be promoted as it currently is by these companies. Part of governments job is to regulate business, mis/disinformation is going to become a huge problem in the years ahead, deep fakes will make it impossible for the user to tell what is real and what is fake and lies spread so much faster than truth. Leaving these companies who only care about their own interests/profits to regulate themselves is madness. That is like expecting oil companies to regulate themselves and then act surprised when badly designed oil tankers or oil rigs spill their contents because it was cheaper. No one is saying the government gets to decide what is lies/fake and what is real but they should legislate to force these platforms to police their content and at the least highlight fakes stories like Community Notes does but its no where near fast enough and as the article I posted points out is easily overwhelmed and notes can be left for days unposted.
 
I know this is truth social related, but it also would effect xitter in one way or another, in particular, it adds to what I've said recently about how it seems Elon is appealing to truth social users to bring them back, and perhaps he can see the writing on the wall for trumps social network.


GNw6mti.png


On the other hand, Elon being Elon may decide to buy it due to the level of truth on the site matching his of late.
 
unwashed potato! said:
I know this is truth social related, but it also would effect xitter in one way or another, in particular, it adds to what I've said recently about how it seems Elon is appealing to truth social users to bring them back, and perhaps he can see the writing on the wall for trumps social network.


GNw6mti.png


On the other hand, Elon being Elon may decide to buy it due to the level of truth on the site matching his of late.
Click to expand...

The amount of MAGA fools on The Donald that poured their savings into that is hilarious. Its like they've never bothered to listen to Donny will happily take everything they had as long as he makes something. Its clearly all going to fold, does sound like the investors will at least get something back from DWAC.

If I were petty I'd trawl back through when this was first launched and all the Trump fans saying how incredible it was, how it would be bigger than Twitter and would be worth $billions. Always best to go with the line "everything Donny touches dies".

No way Elon buys it, he has enough problems without adding that bag of extremists.
 
Last edited:
Colonel_Klinck said:
The WMD example doesn't work, no one knew if he did or didn't have them in 2003. We absolutely knew he had had them, that is undisputed. So it was just a best guess from conflicting information as to whether he had destroyed them all or still had some.



You said here you don't want governments to regulate social media companies and that misinformation should just be left to circulate and be promoted as it currently is by these companies. Part of governments job is to regulate business, mis/disinformation is going to become a huge problem in the years ahead, deep fakes will make it impossible for the user to tell what is real and what is fake and lies spread so much faster than truth. Leaving these companies who only care about their own interests/profits to regulate themselves is madness. That is like expecting oil companies to regulate themselves and then act surprised when badly designed oil tankers or oil rigs spill their contents because it was cheaper. No one is saying the government gets to decide what is lies/fake and what is real but they should legislate to force these platforms to police their content and at the least highlight fakes stories like Community Notes does but its no where near fast enough and as the article I posted points out is easily overwhelmed and notes can be left for days unposted.
Click to expand...

He had also committed a genocide, undisputed.
 
Last edited:
Chris Wilson said:
Who would the members here supposedly so aghast at the fact Musk bought X like to see buy it next and run it? Suggest some names please with the means of making it a reality.
Click to expand...

Nah we aren't your monkeys. You suggest some names if you want so that you can do the obvious thing you want to do next which is bash and disagree. youre already ready for it so go ahead.
 
Aww, now come on, no need for a couple of dozen names, just 6 or so will do for a start, I know I ask difficult questions, if it's all too much I'm sure this thread could be moved to SC along with all the others that put people on the unpopular political or whatever spot ;)

Names, who would you like to see buy X, (who has the wherewithal to so do, not just some feckless dreamer)?
 
Chris Wilson said:
Aww, now come on, no need for a couple of dozen names, just 6 or so will do for a start, I know I ask difficult questions, if it's all too much I'm sure this thread could be moved to SC along with all the others that put people on the unpopular political or whatever spot ;)

Names, who would you like to see buy X, (who has the wherewithal to so do, not just some feckless dreamer)?
Click to expand...
How about no.
 
Chris Wilson said:
Aww, now come on, no need for a couple of dozen names, just 6 or so will do for a start, I know I ask difficult questions, if it's all too much I'm sure this thread could be moved to SC along with all the others that put people on the unpopular political or whatever spot ;)

Names, who would you like to see buy X, (who has the wherewithal to so do, not just some feckless dreamer)?
Click to expand...

Why on earth would the average person have list of names of who they would like to take over Twitter ? Like it's a football club or something and everyone has their own preference for manager lol

Twitter isn't going to magically become amazing regardless of who the owner is. Musk may have made it worse but it's not like he's turned a good thing into a bad thing, it was always pretty awful...

Social media is inherently bleak, i don't think any owner is going to change this fact.
 
Last edited:
I would be much happier if it were owned by an American company and it was publicly listed for maximum transparency. I'd also want all the Saudi etc money involved out, the idea that countries so opposed to democracy, free speech and human rights have $b invested in this just doesn't sit well with me. No way they aren't using that leverage for their own gain.
 
imtoooldforthis said:
Musk may have made it worse but it's not like he's turned a good thing into a bad thing, it was always pretty awful
Click to expand...
I disagree. out of all the social media sites,relatively speaking, twitter was the best due to it's narrow very specific features. It's easy to see a future in 15 years where twitter would have still existed, while Facebook may have not
 
Last edited:
unwashed potato! said:
I disagree. out of all the social media sites,relatively speaking, twitter was the best due to it's narrow very specific features. It's easy to see a future in 15 years where twitter would have still existed, while Facebook may have not
Click to expand...

Agree. Twitter was the only social media site I used on a daily basis. FB I still have just for extended family/friends to stay in touch, its useful for announcing things like a family bereavement etc. Not interested in IG. I'm in a few subreddits but Twitter was great as a source of news. A 1/3rd of it is now just a massive simp-off to see who can kiss Elon's arse the most. People hanging on his every word and worshiping him. WTF is wrong with people where they worship anyone like that let alone an attention whore who thinks **** stirring and trolling is just the funniest thing but is a thin skinned man child who throws his toys out when it comes back at him or someone else gets all the attention.
 
Last edited:
unwashed potato! said:
I disagree. out of all the social media sites,relatively speaking, twitter was the best due to it's narrow very specific features. It's easy to see a future in 15 years where twitter would have still existed, while Facebook may have not
Click to expand...
Twitter as was also didn't tend to massively change how things work, or try to be deliberately difficult to use as a regular thing.

It was also pretty much ideal for keeping track of people/companies/organisations making announcements without the utter clutter and deliberate attempts to make life as difficult as possible (unlike facebook which I find almost impossible to use for really basic stuff as it feels like Zuck loves to hide everything).
 
Werewolf said:
Twitter as was also didn't tend to massively change how things work, or try to be deliberately difficult to use as a regular thing.

It was also pretty much ideal for keeping track of people/companies/organisations making announcements without the utter clutter and deliberate attempts to make life as difficult as possible (unlike facebook which I find almost impossible to use for really basic stuff as it feels like Zuck loves to hide everything).
Click to expand...
Exactly. News for instance will always exist, and news breaks on twitter first. For that reason, as slow as twitter moves, it did what it did well and confidently.

It's what makes this everything app and tying it to what was twitter, even more crazy
 
Last edited:
Absolutely remarkable given the months of bitterness against Elon Musk's purchase of the media platform no one here can name a single capable person they'd prefer as the owner!

I see someone mentioned it could be owned by a company rather than a wealthy individual. What company and with who at its helm then?

Or is all this just simply blind hatred of Musk's supposed political affiliations with no rational thinkers able to answer a simple question in the heat of the group hatred?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom