5 ms·

If your problem is with the ownership of Twitter, I don’t understand why you would run from the arms of one wannabe cage-fighter into another’s. If your proble

If your problem is with the ownership of Twitter, I don’t understand why you would run from the arms of one wannabe cage-fighter into another’s. If your problem is with ethics, FB isn’t a beacon of good behavior. If your problem is getting rate-limited or losing your blue checkmark, I guess go wild, but you probably already loved Twitter too much to leave.

tqi 3y ago
I think we spend too much time and mental energy questioning other people's reasons for how they spend their free time.
- scythe 3y ago
  You do realize the irony in that statement, correct?
  - burnished 3y ago
    This isn't ironic, they aren't questioning or otherwise probing motives
    - jaynetics 3y ago
      Well, they are questioning the motivation to question the motivation of others. Assuming that this invalidates their point would, however, be a logical fallacy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
      - burnished 3y ago
        Except that they are not questioning that motivation at all - blanket assertion that the activity is done too much but nothing supposed about anyone's reasons or whyfores. I think that statement is being incorrectly reduced/interpreted to 'mind your own business' which would be ironic.
  - tqi 3y ago
    Honestly, touche. In my defense, I said "we" and not "you" for a reason. Also the point I was attempting to make was less "stop doing that" and more "that way madness lies"
e63f67dd-065b 3y ago
It's not about any of those things, it's about just being a well-run internet service. Facebook is very good at running a big internet service that billions use, Twitter not so much under new management. A well-run internet service tries not to keep causing self-inflicted PR disasters. A well-run service is stable, consistently available, doesn't have a large amount of feature churn, and generally has stable leadership making sane decisions about maximising value. None of those things describe Twitter under Musk, but Facebook is a generally well-run company with sound policies and competent leadership. Just because people here disagree with many of Facebook's decisions doesn't make them any less good. I may think that the focus on VR is a strategic mistake, or that Facebook has a PR problem, but generally they're good stewards of the platform they've created and run it fairly well.
- proxiful-wash 3y ago
  [flagged]
- wraptile 3y ago
  can you define "well run"? As in "being a cause of a literal genocide because you couldn't bother to hire a single person to manage the country you're publishing your product in and take any actions to prevent the whole thing" or do we mean "making money" here?
- exodust 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - prox 3y ago
    But we don’t need Twitter for that do we? We have 4chan, parts of the fediverse and so on for unfiltered. Threads is for mainstream. I don’t see that as bad. As someone who was a moderator, sometimes you want that sandwich and not Joe Schmoe stupid verbal trash he thought less than 3 seconds about.
    - exodust 3y ago
threeseed 3y ago
No my problem with Twitter is that the quality of the discourse is poor and getting worse every day. Which is a direct result of Musk deciding to prioritise blue check comments over others. If you're having to pay to have people listen to you then that means you typically don't have something worth saying. And we see this manifest in many ways e.g. pages of laughing emojis in response to a tweet.
- mongol 3y ago
  > If you're having to pay to have people listen to you then that means you typically don't have something worth saying. This basically invalidates all of advertising in one stroke.
  - goodpoint 3y ago
    As it should. Why, did you think ads were valuable information?
  - xg15 3y ago
    That's correct. I think this is how most people see advertising.
    - csallen 3y ago
      Advertising works extremely well precisely because most people are aware that many brands with something of value are also willing to pay for ads. Look at Apple.
      - mrguyorama 3y ago
        I would bet a small majority of people believe advertising "doesn't work" on them.
    - prox 3y ago
      For me it depends on the advertising. A brand that sells say bags? It’s fine, I love a cool bag. And then there is the “Play this one stupid game that has everyone hooked!!!” With an unrelated picture. Or “This guy became a millionaire in ONE day!1!” type of advertising.
tedunangst 3y ago
Zuck seems rather less likely to dig up one of my posts just to say "did your brain fall out" directing the attention of his 100m followers to then also dump on my post.
- edandersen 3y ago
  Sadly they copied the Quote Tweet function for Threads, when Mastodon mercifully didn't.
_cenw 3y ago
My problems don't really matter here, where most of my community moves does. And lots of them seem to think the fediverse is to complicated, some that sign up just put the local part of their username into places.
seanhunter 3y ago
I don't use Twitter or Facebook or IG so I also won't be using Zuck's new thing. That said, I did a quick straw poll of some non-tech relatives who have not expressed to me any previous opinion either way about Elon Musk and the takeover and got told "Twitter is really weird now and full of ads" and "I can't find anything any more". Anecdotal, but it seems to me twitter would be vulnerable if enough users felt that way. All of the people I spoke with in this very non-scientific and non-representative sample already have instagram accounts so it would be pretty easy for them to move over. A lot of the prominent accounts seem to be moving. It may be because they want a general public square rather than Elons personal website. It may be because they are worried that the rate limiting etc is going to affect what they do to monitor their reach, understand their audience etc. Either way I don't think their problems fall into any of the categories you've given exactly, but if the people someone likes to follow on twitter move to threads, the likelihood is that person will move to threads, especially if they are somewhat dissatisfied because the app is becoming weird and stuffed with ads.
- prox 3y ago
  I just went unto Threads and I saw quite a bit the sentiment of “I can read stuff again without being limited.” and people asking if so and so had switched.
lost_tourist 3y ago
I expect that Meta will filter out a lot more antivax, nazi, MAGA, and racist drivel that I don't want to see which is readily available just about anytime I read the comment on just about any news story.
ricardo81 3y ago
So does Threads solve the problem of viewing things logged out? FB always had this tendency of rate limiting (showing an annoying sign up modal and then eventually silently failing due to HTTP 429 ajax requests- seemingly IP rate limiting). It also seems to not allow viewing of otherwise public info based on user agent (mobile vs desktop)
stOneskull 3y ago
is twitter going to embrace activitypub or not

tqi 3y ago

I think we spend too much time and mental energy questioning other people's reasons for how they spend their free time.

scythe 3y ago
You do realize the irony in that statement, correct?
- burnished 3y ago
  This isn't ironic, they aren't questioning or otherwise probing motives
  - jaynetics 3y ago
    Well, they are questioning the motivation to question the motivation of others. Assuming that this invalidates their point would, however, be a logical fallacy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
    - burnished 3y ago
      Except that they are not questioning that motivation at all - blanket assertion that the activity is done too much but nothing supposed about anyone's reasons or whyfores. I think that statement is being incorrectly reduced/interpreted to 'mind your own business' which would be ironic.
- tqi 3y ago
  Honestly, touche. In my defense, I said "we" and not "you" for a reason. Also the point I was attempting to make was less "stop doing that" and more "that way madness lies"

e63f67dd-065b 3y ago

It's not about any of those things, it's about just being a well-run internet service. Facebook is very good at running a big internet service that billions use, Twitter not so much under new management. A well-run internet service tries not to keep causing self-inflicted PR disasters. A well-run service is stable, consistently available, doesn't have a large amount of feature churn, and generally has stable leadership making sane decisions about maximising value. None of those things describe Twitter under Musk, but Facebook is a generally well-run company with sound policies and competent leadership. Just because people here disagree with many of Facebook's decisions doesn't make them any less good. I may think that the focus on VR is a strategic mistake, or that Facebook has a PR problem, but generally they're good stewards of the platform they've created and run it fairly well.

proxiful-wash 3y ago
[flagged]
wraptile 3y ago
can you define "well run"? As in "being a cause of a literal genocide because you couldn't bother to hire a single person to manage the country you're publishing your product in and take any actions to prevent the whole thing" or do we mean "making money" here?
exodust 3y ago
[flagged]
- prox 3y ago
  But we don’t need Twitter for that do we? We have 4chan, parts of the fediverse and so on for unfiltered. Threads is for mainstream. I don’t see that as bad. As someone who was a moderator, sometimes you want that sandwich and not Joe Schmoe stupid verbal trash he thought less than 3 seconds about.
  - exodust 3y ago

threeseed 3y ago

No my problem with Twitter is that the quality of the discourse is poor and getting worse every day. Which is a direct result of Musk deciding to prioritise blue check comments over others. If you're having to pay to have people listen to you then that means you typically don't have something worth saying. And we see this manifest in many ways e.g. pages of laughing emojis in response to a tweet.

mongol 3y ago
> If you're having to pay to have people listen to you then that means you typically don't have something worth saying. This basically invalidates all of advertising in one stroke.
- goodpoint 3y ago
  As it should. Why, did you think ads were valuable information?
- xg15 3y ago
  That's correct. I think this is how most people see advertising.
  - csallen 3y ago
    Advertising works extremely well precisely because most people are aware that many brands with something of value are also willing to pay for ads. Look at Apple.
    - mrguyorama 3y ago
      I would bet a small majority of people believe advertising "doesn't work" on them.
  - prox 3y ago
    For me it depends on the advertising. A brand that sells say bags? It’s fine, I love a cool bag. And then there is the “Play this one stupid game that has everyone hooked!!!” With an unrelated picture. Or “This guy became a millionaire in ONE day!1!” type of advertising.

tedunangst 3y ago

Zuck seems rather less likely to dig up one of my posts just to say "did your brain fall out" directing the attention of his 100m followers to then also dump on my post.

edandersen 3y ago
Sadly they copied the Quote Tweet function for Threads, when Mastodon mercifully didn't.

_cenw 3y ago

My problems don't really matter here, where most of my community moves does. And lots of them seem to think the fediverse is to complicated, some that sign up just put the local part of their username into places.

seanhunter 3y ago

I don't use Twitter or Facebook or IG so I also won't be using Zuck's new thing. That said, I did a quick straw poll of some non-tech relatives who have not expressed to me any previous opinion either way about Elon Musk and the takeover and got told "Twitter is really weird now and full of ads" and "I can't find anything any more". Anecdotal, but it seems to me twitter would be vulnerable if enough users felt that way. All of the people I spoke with in this very non-scientific and non-representative sample already have instagram accounts so it would be pretty easy for them to move over. A lot of the prominent accounts seem to be moving. It may be because they want a general public square rather than Elons personal website. It may be because they are worried that the rate limiting etc is going to affect what they do to monitor their reach, understand their audience etc. Either way I don't think their problems fall into any of the categories you've given exactly, but if the people someone likes to follow on twitter move to threads, the likelihood is that person will move to threads, especially if they are somewhat dissatisfied because the app is becoming weird and stuffed with ads.

prox 3y ago
I just went unto Threads and I saw quite a bit the sentiment of “I can read stuff again without being limited.” and people asking if so and so had switched.

lost_tourist 3y ago

I expect that Meta will filter out a lot more antivax, nazi, MAGA, and racist drivel that I don't want to see which is readily available just about anytime I read the comment on just about any news story.

ricardo81 3y ago

So does Threads solve the problem of viewing things logged out? FB always had this tendency of rate limiting (showing an annoying sign up modal and then eventually silently failing due to HTTP 429 ajax requests- seemingly IP rate limiting). It also seems to not allow viewing of otherwise public info based on user agent (mobile vs desktop)

stOneskull 3y ago

is twitter going to embrace activitypub or not