3 ms·
This argument is double edged. If on the one hand you argue that the free speech twitter clones are uncompelling, you have to also agree that the proposed feat
by jayd16 5y ago
This argument is double edged. If on the one hand you argue that the free speech twitter clones are uncompelling, you have to also agree that the proposed features are inconsequential, no? What's the point of Elon shaking things up?
I also think its odd to mix altruistic ideas like free speech platforms with profitable network effects. If it's just about speech, why can't such a platform co-exist with Twitter? Why does it need to overtake Twitter?
- darawk 5y agoThat's not how network effects work. Network effects lock users into the platform with the users, regardless of whether a new platform with better features comes along. That's the whole point of a network effect.
- Toboe 5y ago>If on the one hand you argue that the free speech twitter clones are uncompelling, you have to also agree that the proposed features are inconsequential, no? No? It is entirely possible to imagine consequential features that are uncompelling: Actively hostile features. >I also think its odd to mix altruistic ideas like free speech platforms with profitable network effects. Why does it need to overtake Twitter? What is the value in Twitter over the "free speech" clones if Twitters audience doesn't have value? Does Twitter have such unique features that couldn't be replicated much cheaper than the buy price?