3 ms·

So you're in a boat, and a hole is in the base, and well, only a little bit of water has come in so far. Everything is fine? In november of last year, there

by zzzeek 3y ago

So you're in a boat, and a hole is in the base, and well, only a little bit of water has come in so far. Everything is fine? In november of last year, there were no alternatives to Twitter at all save for Mastodon which was an unknown open source backwater. nobody needed them. Now we have a vastly larger Mastodon userbase as well as extremely serious competitors like Threads, Bluesky, Post, etc on the scene, and to a greater or lesser degree, people are moving to them. This seems pretty significant to me, if I were the person in charge of keeping Twitter where everyone is Bigger picture, this kind of discussion is so silly. When Musk took over Twitter, Hacker News was all like "hooray! free speech at last!" what a joke, right? the man literally throttles /bans individual users and offlinks he personally doesn't like. I am going to posit right here that all of this "ho ho, the data shows nothing, if anything scientists are joining twitter" will also be similarly ridiculous in six months.

londons_explore 3y ago
In which case, the headline could be "7% of scientists have moved from twitter to other platforms. Could this be the start of a grand exodus?"
- zzzeek 3y ago
  The full headline was too long to post. The headline is: "Thousands of scientists are cutting back on Twitter, seeding angst and uncertainty" I think "seeding" is pretty directly in line with "could this be the start". Plus, they aren't really even getting at any kind of "grand exodus" here. That's not what this article is about. It's about there being no one place that is a clearinghouse for new scientific research to be posted, that is, a fragmenting of the community. so you're correct! they used your idea. but they aren't getting at a "grand exodus" in any case, just the platform itself no longer being an effective place on which scientific researchers would singularly focus .

by zzzeek 3y ago

londons_explore 3y ago

In which case, the headline could be "7% of scientists have moved from twitter to other platforms. Could this be the start of a grand exodus?"

zzzeek 3y ago
The full headline was too long to post. The headline is: "Thousands of scientists are cutting back on Twitter, seeding angst and uncertainty" I think "seeding" is pretty directly in line with "could this be the start". Plus, they aren't really even getting at any kind of "grand exodus" here. That's not what this article is about. It's about there being no one place that is a clearinghouse for new scientific research to be posted, that is, a fragmenting of the community. so you're correct! they used your idea. but they aren't getting at a "grand exodus" in any case, just the platform itself no longer being an effective place on which scientific researchers would singularly focus .