5 ms·

Twitter is a mob launch pad. It's ran by outrage addicted, sadistic, cruel bullies. It's as if all of the world's village idiots joined forces and became the ru

by fleddr 5y ago

Twitter is a mob launch pad. It's ran by outrage addicted, sadistic, cruel bullies. It's as if all of the world's village idiots joined forces and became the ruling class in culture and speech. It is Twitter that has normalized and promoted inhumane tactics like context switching, bad faith discussion, talking behind you to others instead of towards you (quote tweeting), screenshotting, obsessively digging through one's history, mob launches, and in some cases cancellations, death threats, etc. No normal person engages with another person like this. They are tactics to use when at war, but this is business as usual on Twitter. Worse, it's richly rewarded. It's a place where brains and conversations go to die. I hope the offer gets accepted, it's not like he can make it worse. Or perhaps he should intentionally make it worse and sink it.

fleischhauf 5y ago
while this might be true for most of Twitter, my experience is very different. I've been following researchers mostly and aside from very recently published work there are very interesting conversations or thought threads.so i guess it heavily depends on your Twitter bubble
boredumb 5y ago
It's a nice thought, but 43 billion dollars is a helluva price to pay for an intentional sepoku.
Karrot_Kream 5y ago
I'm not usually one for this kind of schadenfreude but I find myself agreeing. It really can't get any worse.
Teandw 5y ago
People have always engaged with other people like they do on Twitter. You don't think even before social media there was a world where people spread lies about you, spread hatred and people who would do anything in their power to ruin your marriage, career or life in general? You just see it more these days because it's more easily visible. It doesn't mean it happens more than it used to.
qq66 5y ago
I don't intend to refute anything you've written because I agree with pretty much all of it. But there is more to Twitter than that. Twitter is also a collective mind in a way that has only previously existed in science fiction. There are conversations about virtual reality where I regularly engage with people from Europe, Asia, the US, some people who don't really go out of their house but are very active on VR Twitter, displaced Ukrainian developers finding VR development work... and really thought-provoking interactions every week, like a "My Dinner with Andre" in the global hive-mind. I think of Twitter as something like "The Internet" or "nuclear fission" -- a tool so powerful that it can either destroy or save the world, and to just destroy it would be a catastrophic loss.
- r3trohack3r 5y ago
  The human hive mind existed long before Twitter. Very little of a human's knowledge is discovered by them, it's passed from generation to generation. First it was spoken, then written, then typed. But social media, when looked at through the lens of collective thought, is unwell IMH(umble)O. I remember participating in old phpBB forums in the mid/late 90s. You'd show up for an hour, read everything that happened over the last few days, go off an think about it, come back later and respond. The conversations were deep and thoughtful, even if the topics weren't. If I sat in a room with someone who thought/behaved like these forums, I'd be comfortable. It would be a good conversation, I'd feel safe, and I'd probably walk away learning something new. If a physical human thought the way the Twitter hive mind thinks - I'd avoid them. They would be terrifying. Jumping from thought to thought, rapidly transitioning emotional states, unable to focus on a topic for more than a social media cycle, constantly checking to see if people like what they said... The hive mind on many of the popular social media platforms is not healthy. I don't think this outcome is inevitable when large groups of people come together to communicate. It feels like a byproduct of engagement driven social media - where the flywheel of growth/profits is coupled to humans constantly indicating to the system that they are "engaged" by interacting in some way.
- dsl 5y ago
  > Twitter is also a collective mind in a way that has only previously existed in science fiction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet You might not have been around for it, but we did this before. The same lesson was learned then too... this is why we can't have nice things.
chrisseaton 5y ago
If your Twitter feed is angry then maybe you have angry friends. That’s not a reflection on Twitter. Mine has a lot of inspiration and positivity.
- gardenhedge 5y ago
  This is not a good take. Despite who you follow, Twitter shows you random stuff and also shows you the trending section. That section is just full of controversial things.
  - oneeyedpigeon 5y ago
    I've personally hidden the trending section - fair point, though. But that was the only time I really saw 'random stuff'.
  - NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
    I deliberately ignore the trending section because twitter has a 'trends blacklist'. So it's Twitter Management Approved Trending™, not what's actually trending.
- fleddr 5y ago
  This comment is made very often but it doesn't negate the point. The discussion is not about one's individual experience, it's about the general cultural phenomenon that is Twitter. When extremists have millions of followers and thereby have an outsized (negative) influence on society this has a macro impact.
_skzr 5y ago
[ “Insert pseudo-intellectual comment about private organizations, town squares, current things, billionaires, democracy, and Nazis” ] In short, yes. It is a hate-factory that assumes the laptop-class of society is representative of and speaks for all of mankind. Err, people kind.
coliveira 5y ago
I agree that the current crop of social networks is pretty much worse than useless. I wish they all ended so that we can build something better.
- cvwright 5y ago
  Why wait? Let’s just build.
oneeyedpigeon 5y ago
You're talking about a specific subset of Twitter. The Twitter I use is 99% positive, good news, friendly interactions. I've gained at least one job directly through Twitter.
runjake 5y ago
As a counterpoint, you are also describing any large group of people at scale. On Twitter, you can follow, mute, use lists, or block anyone you want so you don’t have to see any of the stuff you don’t want.
- zarzavat 5y ago
  If this sale goes ahead it will be interesting to find out Elon Musk’s definition of free speech. Is a mob “speech”? Under one perspective mobs are not speech, they are repressions on speech and thus any free speech advocate ought to want to clamp down on them. Under another perspective mobs are speech, and should be protected like any other speech. Neither perspective is wrong per se, it just depends how you interpret the “free” in free speech to refer to freedom from what.
hi5eyes 5y ago
Sir you are engaging with negative communities, out of your own free time Twitter, is just how you construct your feed; if you gravitate towards toxic communities/follows, that's just a reflection of yourself Twitter in my experience has some incredibly informative people from multiple industries and plenty of positive ribbing, but mainly used to collaborate and support each other
javajosh 5y ago
>Twitter is a mob launch pad. True, but you don't have to participate and you can try to stop it, if you want. >It's ran by outrage addicted, sadistic, cruel bullies. Not sure, but I think this is false. It seems to be run professionally, for profit, and with a great deal of thought. > It's as if all of the world's village idiots joined forces and became the ruling class in culture and speech. False, but with a seed of truth: Twitter has undue influence over decision makers because it satisfies their constant need for feedback. Powerful people take Twitter feedback far more seriously then they should. The worst example being businesses that fire people because of a cancel mob to "protect their reputation". (IMO such cancellations do far more harm to the business reputation demonstrating terrible judgement) >No normal person engages with another person like this. False. Or rather, you characterize Twitter engagement in one way, and ignore all the other ways. I, for example, enjoy engaging with smart, good people from around the world. The key is to a) be careful about who you follow, and b) give 0 care about likes, retweets, etc. Twitter is not really one place, it's a huge network of places, a bit like Reddit, and so behavior and content varies significantly.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  > False. Or rather, you characterize Twitter engagement in one way, and ignore all the other ways. I, for example, enjoy engaging with smart, good people from around the world. You don't need Twitter to do that. Arguably, it was easier to engage with the smart, good people from around the world on IRC since it wasn't through the guise of microblogging 240 characters at one another in public. I think it's perfectly fine to characterize Twitter by it's lowest common denominator. > The key is to a) be careful about who you follow, and b) give 0 care about likes, retweets, etc. Sounds like it's a fundamentally broken system then, no? If it's incentivizing toxic engagement and behavior patterns, that's an issue. > Twitter is not really one place, it's a huge network of places, a bit like Reddit, and so behavior and content varies significantly. No, it is "one place". There are federated networks similar to Twitter like Mastodon and Pleroma where that is the case, but Twitter is one homogenous userbase, for better or worse. You're lumped in with the left-wing pundits, the right-wing trolls and everyone in between. Generally speaking, this comment kinda makes me sad. Nobody needs to take the bullet for Twitter, of all places. It's notoriously shitty by-and-large, and while some people have gotten it to work for them (more power to you), trying to claim it's a universally altruistic platform if you ignore the bad stuff is simply disingenuous.
dpweb 5y ago
It needs to be better policed but I sense it's way undervalued being one of the few huge media platforms. It's a smart move. Meta market cap was 1T down to 600B. Other techs market caps? 43B sounds like a bargain. Just the hype off this, and the excitement that will inevitably follow every tweak to the platform - tens of billions up in value.
jacquesm 5y ago
Twitter is who you follow. It may take some configuration but all of the other stuff can - for now - be removed.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

by fleddr 5y ago

fleischhauf 5y ago

while this might be true for most of Twitter, my experience is very different. I've been following researchers mostly and aside from very recently published work there are very interesting conversations or thought threads.so i guess it heavily depends on your Twitter bubble

boredumb 5y ago

It's a nice thought, but 43 billion dollars is a helluva price to pay for an intentional sepoku.

Karrot_Kream 5y ago

I'm not usually one for this kind of schadenfreude but I find myself agreeing. It really can't get any worse.

Teandw 5y ago

People have always engaged with other people like they do on Twitter. You don't think even before social media there was a world where people spread lies about you, spread hatred and people who would do anything in their power to ruin your marriage, career or life in general? You just see it more these days because it's more easily visible. It doesn't mean it happens more than it used to.

qq66 5y ago

I don't intend to refute anything you've written because I agree with pretty much all of it. But there is more to Twitter than that. Twitter is also a collective mind in a way that has only previously existed in science fiction. There are conversations about virtual reality where I regularly engage with people from Europe, Asia, the US, some people who don't really go out of their house but are very active on VR Twitter, displaced Ukrainian developers finding VR development work... and really thought-provoking interactions every week, like a "My Dinner with Andre" in the global hive-mind. I think of Twitter as something like "The Internet" or "nuclear fission" -- a tool so powerful that it can either destroy or save the world, and to just destroy it would be a catastrophic loss.

r3trohack3r 5y ago
The human hive mind existed long before Twitter. Very little of a human's knowledge is discovered by them, it's passed from generation to generation. First it was spoken, then written, then typed. But social media, when looked at through the lens of collective thought, is unwell IMH(umble)O. I remember participating in old phpBB forums in the mid/late 90s. You'd show up for an hour, read everything that happened over the last few days, go off an think about it, come back later and respond. The conversations were deep and thoughtful, even if the topics weren't. If I sat in a room with someone who thought/behaved like these forums, I'd be comfortable. It would be a good conversation, I'd feel safe, and I'd probably walk away learning something new. If a physical human thought the way the Twitter hive mind thinks - I'd avoid them. They would be terrifying. Jumping from thought to thought, rapidly transitioning emotional states, unable to focus on a topic for more than a social media cycle, constantly checking to see if people like what they said... The hive mind on many of the popular social media platforms is not healthy. I don't think this outcome is inevitable when large groups of people come together to communicate. It feels like a byproduct of engagement driven social media - where the flywheel of growth/profits is coupled to humans constantly indicating to the system that they are "engaged" by interacting in some way.
dsl 5y ago
> Twitter is also a collective mind in a way that has only previously existed in science fiction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet You might not have been around for it, but we did this before. The same lesson was learned then too... this is why we can't have nice things.

chrisseaton 5y ago

If your Twitter feed is angry then maybe you have angry friends. That’s not a reflection on Twitter. Mine has a lot of inspiration and positivity.

gardenhedge 5y ago
This is not a good take. Despite who you follow, Twitter shows you random stuff and also shows you the trending section. That section is just full of controversial things.
- oneeyedpigeon 5y ago
  I've personally hidden the trending section - fair point, though. But that was the only time I really saw 'random stuff'.
- NaturalPhallacy 5y ago
  I deliberately ignore the trending section because twitter has a 'trends blacklist'. So it's Twitter Management Approved Trending™, not what's actually trending.
fleddr 5y ago
This comment is made very often but it doesn't negate the point. The discussion is not about one's individual experience, it's about the general cultural phenomenon that is Twitter. When extremists have millions of followers and thereby have an outsized (negative) influence on society this has a macro impact.

_skzr 5y ago

[ “Insert pseudo-intellectual comment about private organizations, town squares, current things, billionaires, democracy, and Nazis” ] In short, yes. It is a hate-factory that assumes the laptop-class of society is representative of and speaks for all of mankind. Err, people kind.

coliveira 5y ago

I agree that the current crop of social networks is pretty much worse than useless. I wish they all ended so that we can build something better.

cvwright 5y ago
Why wait? Let’s just build.

oneeyedpigeon 5y ago

You're talking about a specific subset of Twitter. The Twitter I use is 99% positive, good news, friendly interactions. I've gained at least one job directly through Twitter.

runjake 5y ago

As a counterpoint, you are also describing any large group of people at scale. On Twitter, you can follow, mute, use lists, or block anyone you want so you don’t have to see any of the stuff you don’t want.

zarzavat 5y ago
If this sale goes ahead it will be interesting to find out Elon Musk’s definition of free speech. Is a mob “speech”? Under one perspective mobs are not speech, they are repressions on speech and thus any free speech advocate ought to want to clamp down on them. Under another perspective mobs are speech, and should be protected like any other speech. Neither perspective is wrong per se, it just depends how you interpret the “free” in free speech to refer to freedom from what.

hi5eyes 5y ago

Sir you are engaging with negative communities, out of your own free time Twitter, is just how you construct your feed; if you gravitate towards toxic communities/follows, that's just a reflection of yourself Twitter in my experience has some incredibly informative people from multiple industries and plenty of positive ribbing, but mainly used to collaborate and support each other

javajosh 5y ago

>Twitter is a mob launch pad. True, but you don't have to participate and you can try to stop it, if you want. >It's ran by outrage addicted, sadistic, cruel bullies. Not sure, but I think this is false. It seems to be run professionally, for profit, and with a great deal of thought. > It's as if all of the world's village idiots joined forces and became the ruling class in culture and speech. False, but with a seed of truth: Twitter has undue influence over decision makers because it satisfies their constant need for feedback. Powerful people take Twitter feedback far more seriously then they should. The worst example being businesses that fire people because of a cancel mob to "protect their reputation". (IMO such cancellations do far more harm to the business reputation demonstrating terrible judgement) >No normal person engages with another person like this. False. Or rather, you characterize Twitter engagement in one way, and ignore all the other ways. I, for example, enjoy engaging with smart, good people from around the world. The key is to a) be careful about who you follow, and b) give 0 care about likes, retweets, etc. Twitter is not really one place, it's a huge network of places, a bit like Reddit, and so behavior and content varies significantly.

smoldesu 5y ago
> False. Or rather, you characterize Twitter engagement in one way, and ignore all the other ways. I, for example, enjoy engaging with smart, good people from around the world. You don't need Twitter to do that. Arguably, it was easier to engage with the smart, good people from around the world on IRC since it wasn't through the guise of microblogging 240 characters at one another in public. I think it's perfectly fine to characterize Twitter by it's lowest common denominator. > The key is to a) be careful about who you follow, and b) give 0 care about likes, retweets, etc. Sounds like it's a fundamentally broken system then, no? If it's incentivizing toxic engagement and behavior patterns, that's an issue. > Twitter is not really one place, it's a huge network of places, a bit like Reddit, and so behavior and content varies significantly. No, it is "one place". There are federated networks similar to Twitter like Mastodon and Pleroma where that is the case, but Twitter is one homogenous userbase, for better or worse. You're lumped in with the left-wing pundits, the right-wing trolls and everyone in between. Generally speaking, this comment kinda makes me sad. Nobody needs to take the bullet for Twitter, of all places. It's notoriously shitty by-and-large, and while some people have gotten it to work for them (more power to you), trying to claim it's a universally altruistic platform if you ignore the bad stuff is simply disingenuous.

dpweb 5y ago

It needs to be better policed but I sense it's way undervalued being one of the few huge media platforms. It's a smart move. Meta market cap was 1T down to 600B. Other techs market caps? 43B sounds like a bargain. Just the hype off this, and the excitement that will inevitably follow every tweak to the platform - tens of billions up in value.

jacquesm 5y ago

Twitter is who you follow. It may take some configuration but all of the other stuff can - for now - be removed.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]