4 ms·

I wish him and the team the very best. Social media is an incredibly hard problem that by no means has been solved. I raise a glass to a man who has successfull

by scop 4y ago

I wish him and the team the very best. Social media is an incredibly hard problem that by no means has been solved. I raise a glass to a man who has successfully tackled hard problems and seeks to make the future better.

hooande 4y ago
I'd be surprised if there's anyone here who thinks he'll succeed
- fullshark 4y ago
  Define success? I think he will help twitter a lot cause they have been suffering from a leadership void for years. I don't think Twitter will become a trillion dollar company but they will be around a long time and be profitable, and there's a decent chance Musk could go public again and recoup some of the acquistion price and remain in control.
ausbah 4y ago
that's an optimistic take, as much as I dislike Musk it would be nice if he managed to make Twitter a better experience for the average user. given that social media is more of a people problem than a engineering problem, I'm not as hopeful
defterGoose 4y ago
The idea that a social media company is capable of making a dent in "making the future better" is kind of laughable if you have any sort of rational ideas for what makes a good life...
- bluescrn 4y ago
  Maybe they could make the future slightly less worse, though. (Just turning the thing off would do that)
- gallerdude 4y ago
  I think that saying social media can't make the future better is like saying the internet itself can't make the future better. It seems obvious to me that both can improve humanity.
- JoshCole 4y ago
  I'll show you are wrong by showing that your ideas aren't consistent. I'll show your ideas aren't consistent by showing your ideas are self-refuting. Your post denies its own utility. Observe: Lets say you are correct. As a direct result of being on a social media product you are claiming that it is "kind of laughable" that anyone with "rational ideas" would think your comment is "capable" of "making a dent" in "making the future better." Your polemic against the conceptual framework of socially derived value is self refuting in that it attacks itself. It can't stand. Now lets approach refuting your claim a different way, not of itself, but instead by providing a rational idea which is compatible with the idea of a good life and is a byproduct of social media. Social isolation is known to create extremely negative well being consequences in social actors. Pandemics encourage physical isolation. Social media provides a mechanism for social interaction despite physical isolation. Yet your claim is so strong that you accidentally imply that even the idea that a large segment of the population avoiding fractured sanity might be of benefit to our future is laughable and has no rational bearing. Self-refuting, inconsistent with observation. But why? How do you get there? I think you get there because you are an intelligent observer. Game theoretic tit for tat consequences of defection take time to play out and produce a bubble of observation from your perspective which misinform your beliefs. Defection in game theoretic terms is truly laughable, though rational in zero sum games; it is obviously inferior to policies rooted in love which don't degenerate into tit for tat destruction of value. We're in such a time and in such a bubble and so there are many which draw the obvious conclusions. It looks different over larger time slices and so different people come to different conclusions on the value of social utility. Ultimately, this results in them not only valuing social utility, but valuing it even to the extent of free speech to those they vehemently disagree with. Going into why leads to arguments rooted in information theory, ensemble models, and shared values; yet with literal and without any hyperbole war occurring even as we speak and one of the battlefields being social media, this isn't currently a compelling thing. Self-preservation instincts are strong enough that even near certain victory doesn't dispel them. Anyone who goes cliff diving into water will have sensed this. Jumping is hard, even if the action is safe, it doesn't feel that way. And we think fast and with feeling because reality is so complicated that to do anything else would be paralysis. Free speech is probably safe. Social media probably does have value. Yet it is hard to see it, because society is still learning and part of that learning process is punishing defectors in our shared cooperative game which demands love above all else.
froggertoaster 4y ago
Serious question: what does "solving" social media even mean?
misiti3780 4y ago
I know a lot of people disagree but I really do think killing the ad side and killing all bots will solve 90% of the problems. I know they need to find other revenue other than ads, Elon might be able to find a replacement once it's a private company.
- makeitdouble 4y ago
  Your argument comes down to getting rid of current revenue and let Elon come with an unknown magic replacement, and solving an intractable problem (solving 90% of bots for Twitter is like solving Google Search's spam issues) on the side. I wouldn't disagree, it just feels more like a wishlist that anything.
john-radio 4y ago
> I raise a glass to a man who has successfully tackled hard problems and seeks to make the future better. But what is your comment on billionaire Elon Musk buying Twitter.com?

by scop 4y ago

hooande 4y ago

I'd be surprised if there's anyone here who thinks he'll succeed

fullshark 4y ago
Define success? I think he will help twitter a lot cause they have been suffering from a leadership void for years. I don't think Twitter will become a trillion dollar company but they will be around a long time and be profitable, and there's a decent chance Musk could go public again and recoup some of the acquistion price and remain in control.

ausbah 4y ago

that's an optimistic take, as much as I dislike Musk it would be nice if he managed to make Twitter a better experience for the average user. given that social media is more of a people problem than a engineering problem, I'm not as hopeful

defterGoose 4y ago

The idea that a social media company is capable of making a dent in "making the future better" is kind of laughable if you have any sort of rational ideas for what makes a good life...

bluescrn 4y ago
Maybe they could make the future slightly less worse, though. (Just turning the thing off would do that)
gallerdude 4y ago
I think that saying social media can't make the future better is like saying the internet itself can't make the future better. It seems obvious to me that both can improve humanity.
JoshCole 4y ago
I'll show you are wrong by showing that your ideas aren't consistent. I'll show your ideas aren't consistent by showing your ideas are self-refuting. Your post denies its own utility. Observe: Lets say you are correct. As a direct result of being on a social media product you are claiming that it is "kind of laughable" that anyone with "rational ideas" would think your comment is "capable" of "making a dent" in "making the future better." Your polemic against the conceptual framework of socially derived value is self refuting in that it attacks itself. It can't stand. Now lets approach refuting your claim a different way, not of itself, but instead by providing a rational idea which is compatible with the idea of a good life and is a byproduct of social media. Social isolation is known to create extremely negative well being consequences in social actors. Pandemics encourage physical isolation. Social media provides a mechanism for social interaction despite physical isolation. Yet your claim is so strong that you accidentally imply that even the idea that a large segment of the population avoiding fractured sanity might be of benefit to our future is laughable and has no rational bearing. Self-refuting, inconsistent with observation. But why? How do you get there? I think you get there because you are an intelligent observer. Game theoretic tit for tat consequences of defection take time to play out and produce a bubble of observation from your perspective which misinform your beliefs. Defection in game theoretic terms is truly laughable, though rational in zero sum games; it is obviously inferior to policies rooted in love which don't degenerate into tit for tat destruction of value. We're in such a time and in such a bubble and so there are many which draw the obvious conclusions. It looks different over larger time slices and so different people come to different conclusions on the value of social utility. Ultimately, this results in them not only valuing social utility, but valuing it even to the extent of free speech to those they vehemently disagree with. Going into why leads to arguments rooted in information theory, ensemble models, and shared values; yet with literal and without any hyperbole war occurring even as we speak and one of the battlefields being social media, this isn't currently a compelling thing. Self-preservation instincts are strong enough that even near certain victory doesn't dispel them. Anyone who goes cliff diving into water will have sensed this. Jumping is hard, even if the action is safe, it doesn't feel that way. And we think fast and with feeling because reality is so complicated that to do anything else would be paralysis. Free speech is probably safe. Social media probably does have value. Yet it is hard to see it, because society is still learning and part of that learning process is punishing defectors in our shared cooperative game which demands love above all else.

froggertoaster 4y ago

Serious question: what does "solving" social media even mean?

misiti3780 4y ago

I know a lot of people disagree but I really do think killing the ad side and killing all bots will solve 90% of the problems. I know they need to find other revenue other than ads, Elon might be able to find a replacement once it's a private company.

makeitdouble 4y ago
Your argument comes down to getting rid of current revenue and let Elon come with an unknown magic replacement, and solving an intractable problem (solving 90% of bots for Twitter is like solving Google Search's spam issues) on the side. I wouldn't disagree, it just feels more like a wishlist that anything.

john-radio 4y ago

> I raise a glass to a man who has successfully tackled hard problems and seeks to make the future better. But what is your comment on billionaire Elon Musk buying Twitter.com?