12 ms·
> Him owning Twitter, the way he's currently operating, will force a critical eye toward a lot of bad behaviors that we all experience but nobody really talks a
by yongjik 4y ago
> Him owning Twitter, the way he's currently operating, will force a critical eye toward a lot of bad behaviors that we all experience but nobody really talks about on every network.
Are you talking as a communist meaning "The society has been too lenient on the class of billionaires, but now that one of them is exposed as a destructive idiot, people will be forced to ask whether the rest of them deserve their power over us"?
Because that's the only logically consistent interpretation of your statement I can find.
- Dudelander 4y agoHow did you jump from that to Communism? I though the meaning was pretty clear: People will be more critical regarding social networks. Meaning they will more carefully assess the merits and flaws of Social Networks, instead of just assuming they're good and fun with no real drawbacks.
- yongjik 4y agoBut the thing is, all these things are happening not because Twitter is social media; they're happening because Twitter is led by Elon Musk. I'm not saying everything is fine under Zuckerberg or Pichai, but whatever their flaws are, organizations led by other billionaires don't suffer the same kind of pathology as Musk's Twitter. They operate very differently. So, whatever Musk does, it will not lead to people critically looking at Facebook and Reddit. It will more likely lead to people critically looking at Tesla and SpaceX.
- 8note 4y agoIt's the same thing as trump in the presidency - many things were uncovered to be norms that people follow, rather than strict law When run well, social media stays out of the spotlight, with it's issues swept under the rug enough for regulators to not notice. With musk loudly showing those issues, regulatory interest is drawn, and new rules for social media will be crafted for everyone's benefit across all social media