7 ms·

It really depends on if he follows through on what he is proposing, which seems to be to allow for disinformation and hate speech. If that turns out to not be t

It really depends on if he follows through on what he is proposing, which seems to be to allow for disinformation and hate speech. If that turns out to not be the case, then I might reconsider.

wellthatsawrap 4y ago
Yes. The current information coming from Twatter is is perfectly accurate.
- rb666 4y ago
  So making it far worse is a good plan?
  - wellthatsawrap 4y ago
    How can it be worse? If all Elon did was buy it, fire everyone and liquidate the assets it would be an improvement. Twitter as it stands today is a tool that is being used by nefarious actors to shape the narrative in the US. This is a fact. It's a massive gaslighting and astroturfing operation.
influx 4y ago
Can you point to a source that claims that is what he intends to do? If not, seems like you are the one spewing disinformation.
- andersco 4y ago
  I would suggest googling “Elon Musk Twitter legal speech” - this was one of the top results https://theconversation.com/amp/if-elon-musk-succeeds-in-his-twitter-takeover-it-would-restrict-rather-than-promote-free-speech-181576 https://theconversation.com/amp/if-elon-musk-succeeds-in-his...
  - raspberry1337 4y ago
    A professor somewhere thinks legal speech will restrict speech?! Oh my! That settles it!
panick21_ 4y ago
He also said he wanted to make far more accounts with verified identity and he wants to fight bots. Fighting bots seems to me the opposite of 'allow disinformation'. Also, are we currently blocking people for pushing disinformation? Did I miss something?
- assttoasstmgr 4y ago
  It's not disinformation if you agree with the bots politically. Gotta keep that dopamine raging somehow. Also I've lost count of how much of last year's 'disinformation' became this year's 'that totally happened'.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    Well, whatever but bots are just generally bat and annoying. The platform would be better without them.
    - assttoasstmgr 4y ago
      Oh, absolutely. The platform is overrun with bots. Here's an interesting exercise to try: search for a unique phrase on Twitter and see how many results you get that are posting verbatim copypasta from seemingly "unique" accounts, especially around popular trending topics. Detecting this should not be too difficult I imagine.
    - madeofpalk 4y ago
      "generally bad and annoying" breaks whatever ideal of 'free speech' one might have. The most concrete thing Musk has said is "twitter should just follow the laws of countries", but spam bots are not illegal - USPS cannot unilaterally ban junk mail because that breaks the first amendment Interviewer: You've described yourself, Elon, as a free speech absolutist, but does that mean that there's literally nothing that people can't say and it's okay? Musk: Well, I think obviously Twitter or any forum is bound by the laws of the country that it operates in. So obviously there are some limitations on free speech in the US, and, of course, Twitter would have to abide by those rules. [...] No, I think, like I said, in my view Twitter should match the laws of the country Quite a struggle for an international website, where the majority of users are outside of the US, to just say "we should follow the laws of countries" as if there's one single internationally compatible law for that.
FFRefresh 4y ago
How do you currently measure the amount of disinformation and hate speech on Twitter's platform? And how do you define those terms currently? I can promise you, no matter what he does, people/sites you follow will likely extol how terrible the platform has gotten with disinformation/hate speech, even if he does nothing. How will you protect against that negativity bias? Do you have an objective way to know whether it's gotten worse or not, or are you going to rely on anecdotes from the sources you follow?
assttoasstmgr 4y ago
>If that turns out to not be the case, then I might reconsider. It seems rather narcissistic to think that deleting your account would be of any consequence or inflict punishment on anyone. To put it bluntly, someone farting in their own car on the highway (and potentially soiling themselves, getting distracted, and causing a chain-reaction accident) has a greater potential impact to future events than whatever irrelevant drivel you (or I, or anyone) posts on Twitter.
- altacc 4y ago
  One deleted account is nothing. Many deleted accounts changes the companies value and ability to profit from advertising. Netflix's current woes are not just about subscriber numbers but the numbers didn't have to go down much to make an impact & focus attention on their challenges.
  - assttoasstmgr 4y ago
    That will never happen in sufficient volume to make any meaningful impact. I predict roughly the same amount of cancelled Twitter accounts as those that cancelled their Spotify accounts (and proudly announced doing so to their 8 followers on Twitter) after the whole Joe Rogan kerfuffle. Apparently Rogan gained 2M subscribers in the aftermath. [1] For better or worse, Twitter has become the de-facto town square. The clones have tried and failed because the momentum to move sufficient numbers en masse just isn't there. Do you honestly believe that Musk is such an unpleasant figure that hoards of people would suddenly leave the platform? Where would they go? A digital Jonestown? [1] https://news.yahoo.com/joe-rogan-says-gained-2-122749909.html https://news.yahoo.com/joe-rogan-says-gained-2-122749909.htm...
    - altacc 4y ago
      I don't know what will happen if Musk takes over but I've seen enough platforms disappear to know that their long term longevity is not something I'd bet real money on. Every collapsed empire at one time looked immortal.
- 4y ago
EMM_386 4y ago
> It really depends on if he follows through on what he is proposing, which seems to be to allow for disinformation and hate speech. If you have to put a real, verified name behind these posts, at least that can cut into the massive bot armies spreading disinformation and the massive foreign spending that goes into amplifying all of it. Then you would have the benefits of a free speech platform while preventing it from becoming a psunami of noise. You have to stand behind what you say, because your real name is on it. True, we do have politicians and others trying to spin destructive narratives and spread falsehoods, but it is their right in the United States to do so, as long as it does not run awfoul of existing laws. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517215066550116354 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517215066550116354
- madeofpalk 4y ago
  Requiring "Real Name" (and making it public) is an incredibly privileged position that immediately destroys the website for a significant amount of people. Anonymity is very valuable, especially for some of societies' most vulnerable, who should have a place on social media.
refurb 4y ago
Exactly. If Musk has his way it'll be nothing but people picking quarrels and provoking trouble. We can't have that.

It really depends on if he follows through on what he is proposing, which seems to be to allow for disinformation and hate speech. If that turns out to not be the case, then I might reconsider.

wellthatsawrap 4y ago

Yes. The current information coming from Twatter is is perfectly accurate.

rb666 4y ago
So making it far worse is a good plan?
- wellthatsawrap 4y ago
  How can it be worse? If all Elon did was buy it, fire everyone and liquidate the assets it would be an improvement. Twitter as it stands today is a tool that is being used by nefarious actors to shape the narrative in the US. This is a fact. It's a massive gaslighting and astroturfing operation.

influx 4y ago

Can you point to a source that claims that is what he intends to do? If not, seems like you are the one spewing disinformation.

andersco 4y ago
I would suggest googling “Elon Musk Twitter legal speech” - this was one of the top results https://theconversation.com/amp/if-elon-musk-succeeds-in-his-twitter-takeover-it-would-restrict-rather-than-promote-free-speech-181576 https://theconversation.com/amp/if-elon-musk-succeeds-in-his...
- raspberry1337 4y ago
  A professor somewhere thinks legal speech will restrict speech?! Oh my! That settles it!

panick21_ 4y ago

He also said he wanted to make far more accounts with verified identity and he wants to fight bots. Fighting bots seems to me the opposite of 'allow disinformation'. Also, are we currently blocking people for pushing disinformation? Did I miss something?

assttoasstmgr 4y ago
It's not disinformation if you agree with the bots politically. Gotta keep that dopamine raging somehow. Also I've lost count of how much of last year's 'disinformation' became this year's 'that totally happened'.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  Well, whatever but bots are just generally bat and annoying. The platform would be better without them.
  - assttoasstmgr 4y ago
    Oh, absolutely. The platform is overrun with bots. Here's an interesting exercise to try: search for a unique phrase on Twitter and see how many results you get that are posting verbatim copypasta from seemingly "unique" accounts, especially around popular trending topics. Detecting this should not be too difficult I imagine.
  - madeofpalk 4y ago
    "generally bad and annoying" breaks whatever ideal of 'free speech' one might have. The most concrete thing Musk has said is "twitter should just follow the laws of countries", but spam bots are not illegal - USPS cannot unilaterally ban junk mail because that breaks the first amendment Interviewer: You've described yourself, Elon, as a free speech absolutist, but does that mean that there's literally nothing that people can't say and it's okay? Musk: Well, I think obviously Twitter or any forum is bound by the laws of the country that it operates in. So obviously there are some limitations on free speech in the US, and, of course, Twitter would have to abide by those rules. [...] No, I think, like I said, in my view Twitter should match the laws of the country Quite a struggle for an international website, where the majority of users are outside of the US, to just say "we should follow the laws of countries" as if there's one single internationally compatible law for that.

FFRefresh 4y ago

How do you currently measure the amount of disinformation and hate speech on Twitter's platform? And how do you define those terms currently? I can promise you, no matter what he does, people/sites you follow will likely extol how terrible the platform has gotten with disinformation/hate speech, even if he does nothing. How will you protect against that negativity bias? Do you have an objective way to know whether it's gotten worse or not, or are you going to rely on anecdotes from the sources you follow?

assttoasstmgr 4y ago

>If that turns out to not be the case, then I might reconsider. It seems rather narcissistic to think that deleting your account would be of any consequence or inflict punishment on anyone. To put it bluntly, someone farting in their own car on the highway (and potentially soiling themselves, getting distracted, and causing a chain-reaction accident) has a greater potential impact to future events than whatever irrelevant drivel you (or I, or anyone) posts on Twitter.

altacc 4y ago
One deleted account is nothing. Many deleted accounts changes the companies value and ability to profit from advertising. Netflix's current woes are not just about subscriber numbers but the numbers didn't have to go down much to make an impact & focus attention on their challenges.
- assttoasstmgr 4y ago
  That will never happen in sufficient volume to make any meaningful impact. I predict roughly the same amount of cancelled Twitter accounts as those that cancelled their Spotify accounts (and proudly announced doing so to their 8 followers on Twitter) after the whole Joe Rogan kerfuffle. Apparently Rogan gained 2M subscribers in the aftermath. [1] For better or worse, Twitter has become the de-facto town square. The clones have tried and failed because the momentum to move sufficient numbers en masse just isn't there. Do you honestly believe that Musk is such an unpleasant figure that hoards of people would suddenly leave the platform? Where would they go? A digital Jonestown? [1] https://news.yahoo.com/joe-rogan-says-gained-2-122749909.html https://news.yahoo.com/joe-rogan-says-gained-2-122749909.htm...
  - altacc 4y ago
    I don't know what will happen if Musk takes over but I've seen enough platforms disappear to know that their long term longevity is not something I'd bet real money on. Every collapsed empire at one time looked immortal.
4y ago

EMM_386 4y ago

> It really depends on if he follows through on what he is proposing, which seems to be to allow for disinformation and hate speech. If you have to put a real, verified name behind these posts, at least that can cut into the massive bot armies spreading disinformation and the massive foreign spending that goes into amplifying all of it. Then you would have the benefits of a free speech platform while preventing it from becoming a psunami of noise. You have to stand behind what you say, because your real name is on it. True, we do have politicians and others trying to spin destructive narratives and spread falsehoods, but it is their right in the United States to do so, as long as it does not run awfoul of existing laws. https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517215066550116354 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1517215066550116354

madeofpalk 4y ago
Requiring "Real Name" (and making it public) is an incredibly privileged position that immediately destroys the website for a significant amount of people. Anonymity is very valuable, especially for some of societies' most vulnerable, who should have a place on social media.

refurb 4y ago

Exactly. If Musk has his way it'll be nothing but people picking quarrels and provoking trouble. We can't have that.