4 ms·

Twitter Is Already a Hellscape

11 points by fortran77 4y ago

cable2600 4y ago
I thought Twitter was a Hellscape before Elon bought it? That is why I left Twitter. Mastodon is much better.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Yes, that's the thesis of the article. > With Musk’s regime adding a new source of daily drama, the obsessive navel-gazing seems unlikely to abate. Twitter will still be the “hellsite” that users love to hate.
  - bb88 4y ago
    There's no such thing as bad publicity.
    - eesmith 4y ago
      That's PR-spin to shift blame off PR. And you believe it? It's clearly false.
      - bb88 4y ago
        So, Trump seems to have done okay. He appears to be the most popular republican politician even after losing the presidency and instigating a riot in the capital. Clinton only had sex with an intern, and republicans were willing to throw him overboard for that. That was after the entire "grabbing them by the p*ssy" comment, soooo....
        eesmith 4y ago
        "Watergate." "But her emails." "Sandy Hook was completely fake." "Transgenders want to enter women's bathrooms to commit sex crimes." "COVID is caused by 5G technology." Tell me how these helped Nixon's presidency, Hilary Clinton's election chances, the grieving parents who lost children at Sandy Hook, transgender acceptance, and COVID vaccination rates.
- fortran77 4y ago
  That’s exactly what the article is saying.
- poisonborz 4y ago
  "BTW I use Mastodon"
  - fortran77 4y ago
    on Arch Linux!
- beej71 4y ago
  I'd rather use mastodon than Twitter, since I like decentralized things. But I don't really get the use case for either. (I'm not saying there isn't a valid use case; just saying that I, personally, don't resonate with it.) I have a number of followers who like the links I post, but I never read anything on either platform. Instead, I'm in a number of slack and discord channels with friends and family. That's been working really well for keeping in touch and conversation.
dmix 4y ago
> Late last Thursday, following many months of hesitations, attempted reneging, and last-ditch negotiations, Elon Musk closed a forty-four-billion-dollar deal on his acquisition of Twitter. I know this is journalism but any analysis that doesn't assume Elon was merely gambling ~$10+ million on lawyer fees in hopes of saving $100-500 million on the deal he already commited to buying is lying to themselves. He obviously always wanted Twitter. He was just using the legal avenues every person is provided (especially wealthy people) to save a few bucks in the process. And he lost badly. Would any high paid lawyer tell Elon they should simply accept the deal a week after the price of the stocks tanks? Should you then accept the deal to save face? (Not to rain on the parade of weeks of breathless reporting that pretended otherwise)
- Eji1700 4y ago
  Here's an idea, don't waive due diligence and sign up to buy something at a price that was already aggressive, and then complain about the exact issues which you'll later hope to try and prove a MAC. Any high paid lawyer would have said "don't do ANY of that" to the entire deal. Don't overpay from the start so you can have a meme price. Don't waive due diligence. Don't sabotage your own potential down the line arguments by throwing them around publicly. There were a thousand better ways to handle this if that was the goal. Twitter sued for specific performance and he got screwed because he played fast and loose with the rules and they suddenly applied to him.
  - dmix 4y ago
    I never said his business accumen was correct before the fact? I was merely talking about the rational choice after. What exactly was your legal strategy after the fact that would have worked to reduce the price (vs lawyer fees)? Not buying it at all? Elon just saying yes to the stock price post-crash? Ive read your reply twice and I can't see the more rational alternative? Besides one that the lawyers or media should have felt is the right choice... Apparently having known the price would decline. When they were as high as anyone about the market at the time. If you knew the economy/stock market was going to decline you wouldn't be bothering talking about twitter pre-purchase. And Elon wouldnt give a shit what lawyers think about Twitter and instead be focusing on Tesla and SpaceX. You know... The things that actually made him rich.
taylodl 4y ago
I stopped using Twitter when they made it clear there was one set of rules for content moderation applying to popular people and another set of rules applying to everybody else. That's been years ago and I've since moved on. I see no need at this point to look back.

11 points by fortran77 4y ago

cable2600 4y ago

I thought Twitter was a Hellscape before Elon bought it? That is why I left Twitter. Mastodon is much better.

eesmith 4y ago
Yes, that's the thesis of the article. > With Musk’s regime adding a new source of daily drama, the obsessive navel-gazing seems unlikely to abate. Twitter will still be the “hellsite” that users love to hate.
- bb88 4y ago
  There's no such thing as bad publicity.
  - eesmith 4y ago
    That's PR-spin to shift blame off PR. And you believe it? It's clearly false.
    - bb88 4y ago
      So, Trump seems to have done okay. He appears to be the most popular republican politician even after losing the presidency and instigating a riot in the capital. Clinton only had sex with an intern, and republicans were willing to throw him overboard for that. That was after the entire "grabbing them by the p*ssy" comment, soooo....
      - eesmith 4y ago
        "Watergate." "But her emails." "Sandy Hook was completely fake." "Transgenders want to enter women's bathrooms to commit sex crimes." "COVID is caused by 5G technology." Tell me how these helped Nixon's presidency, Hilary Clinton's election chances, the grieving parents who lost children at Sandy Hook, transgender acceptance, and COVID vaccination rates.
fortran77 4y ago
That’s exactly what the article is saying.
poisonborz 4y ago
"BTW I use Mastodon"
- fortran77 4y ago
  on Arch Linux!
beej71 4y ago
I'd rather use mastodon than Twitter, since I like decentralized things. But I don't really get the use case for either. (I'm not saying there isn't a valid use case; just saying that I, personally, don't resonate with it.) I have a number of followers who like the links I post, but I never read anything on either platform. Instead, I'm in a number of slack and discord channels with friends and family. That's been working really well for keeping in touch and conversation.

dmix 4y ago

> Late last Thursday, following many months of hesitations, attempted reneging, and last-ditch negotiations, Elon Musk closed a forty-four-billion-dollar deal on his acquisition of Twitter. I know this is journalism but any analysis that doesn't assume Elon was merely gambling ~$10+ million on lawyer fees in hopes of saving $100-500 million on the deal he already commited to buying is lying to themselves. He obviously always wanted Twitter. He was just using the legal avenues every person is provided (especially wealthy people) to save a few bucks in the process. And he lost badly. Would any high paid lawyer tell Elon they should simply accept the deal a week after the price of the stocks tanks? Should you then accept the deal to save face? (Not to rain on the parade of weeks of breathless reporting that pretended otherwise)

Eji1700 4y ago
Here's an idea, don't waive due diligence and sign up to buy something at a price that was already aggressive, and then complain about the exact issues which you'll later hope to try and prove a MAC. Any high paid lawyer would have said "don't do ANY of that" to the entire deal. Don't overpay from the start so you can have a meme price. Don't waive due diligence. Don't sabotage your own potential down the line arguments by throwing them around publicly. There were a thousand better ways to handle this if that was the goal. Twitter sued for specific performance and he got screwed because he played fast and loose with the rules and they suddenly applied to him.
- dmix 4y ago
  I never said his business accumen was correct before the fact? I was merely talking about the rational choice after. What exactly was your legal strategy after the fact that would have worked to reduce the price (vs lawyer fees)? Not buying it at all? Elon just saying yes to the stock price post-crash? Ive read your reply twice and I can't see the more rational alternative? Besides one that the lawyers or media should have felt is the right choice... Apparently having known the price would decline. When they were as high as anyone about the market at the time. If you knew the economy/stock market was going to decline you wouldn't be bothering talking about twitter pre-purchase. And Elon wouldnt give a shit what lawyers think about Twitter and instead be focusing on Tesla and SpaceX. You know... The things that actually made him rich.

taylodl 4y ago

I stopped using Twitter when they made it clear there was one set of rules for content moderation applying to popular people and another set of rules applying to everybody else. That's been years ago and I've since moved on. I see no need at this point to look back.