7 ms·

I don't understand your point

sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
Since Musk's acquisition of Twitter, it has increasingly become a right wing echo chamber and place to promote conspiracy theories. And Alex Jones' InfoWars and Elon Musk's Twitter are both likely to show you advertisements for supplements of dubious effectiveness and other generally scammy products. So yeah, Jones fits right in there.
- wordofx 2y ago
  It really hasn’t.
  - sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
    My experience disagrees with yours, I suppose. To me, as a casual user of the platform, that has been the trend. I've been visiting less because of it.
  - bbor 2y ago
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65246394 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65246394 there are both in-depth studies and anecdotal evidence that suggest hate speech has been growing under Mr Musk's tenure. https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/data-shows-x-suspending-far-fewer-users-hate-speech/728136/ https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/data-shows-x-suspendin... Data Shows X Is Suspending Far Fewer Users for Hate Speech And, finally: Alex Jones was unbanned. That alone is proof of rising support for hate speech. He's literally been proven to be a lying provocateur in court, it doesn't get much clearer than that
- wyager 2y ago
  So on the one hand you had Twitter, where the impression you would have had in the first few days of November is that Trump was probably going to win the election. On the other hand you had most other platforms like Reddit, with relatively heavy-handed moderation, where the impression you would have had in the first few days of November is that Trump was probably going to lose the election. So when you want to make a prior judgement on an extremely consequential outcome, which a posteriori was not even close, and one information ecosystem gives you the right answer, and most of the other information ecosystems give you the wrong answer, which information ecosystems do you classify as "echo chambers"? It's possible that this was just a fluke, but it should certainly make you update your priors on which ecosystems provide a more representative sample of base reality.
  - bandyaboot 2y ago
    If I confidently declare ahead of time the result of a coin flip, I may turn out to be correct, but my confidence was still unjustified. And furthermore, my getting it right would not necessitate a “fluke”. I’m on Reddit a fair bit and while it’s difficult to know the overall biases of the greater community based on what I see individually, I don’t have a lot of trouble believing that there was a bias toward a particular desired result. But, I honestly didn’t see much in the way of a bias one way or the other in the expected result. I mostly saw a lot of anxiety over not knowing what result to expect.
    - lazyeye 2y ago
      Elections are not remotely a "coin flip" though?
      - jkubicek 2y ago
        Well sure, but the predicting the results of this particular election was very much a coin flip.
        lazyeye 2y ago
        I disagree. The media makes it seem like a coin flip, but the prediction markets where people are focused on making money was accurate. This is compared to the media who are more interested in pushing lies and ideology.
        threeseed 2y ago
        The prediction markets can be influenced by governments, companies etc who have no desire to make short term money.
        itsoktocry 2y ago
        But polling results cannot. Right.
- tailrecursion 2y ago
  I take it that left wingers feel that "community notes" isn't effective or sufficient to combat right wing beliefs that are wrong? The people on the right seem satisfied for now that they can "combat misinformation with more information". (That's a misquote by the way, I believe he said better information, not more. On second thought, he may have said it both ways.) Has anyone discussed why the right believes this can work, and the left doesn't?
  - Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
    Bullshit Asymmetry Principle[0] always applies. By the time Community Notes has appeared, tens or even hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of people will have seen the misinformation. Even once Community Notes have appeared, many won't read them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_asymmetry_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_asymmetry_principle
    - elektrontamer 2y ago
      Why are we so worried about adults reading incorrect information? Once they eventually find the info was wrong they'll be more sceptical of that source. We know policing speech doesn't work, whoever does the policing introduces their own biases, this was clear as day with the hunter laptop story and how the goverment put pressure on social media companies to supress it.
      - macintux 2y ago
        > Once they eventually find the info was wrong they'll be more sceptical of that source. If they’ve internalized/amplified it, they’ll believe the source, and disregard the contradictory information. This has been well-established over the last, oh, 10 years. Facts are irrelevant if you can choose your own sources.
        the_optimist 2y ago
        This “sounds smart” and I’m sure it circulates well in conversation. In practice, no. The point of “facts” is to identify useful truths that guide decisions. When some portion of the distribution of people identify misalignment, which is inevitable—not optional—then they will true up.
- itsoktocry 2y ago
  You realize old Twitter was literally censoring things they knew to be true but politically damaging, right? Or are you still operating in 2022? Twitter is right wing because your country (and the world) are shifting right. Sorry.
  - aredox 2y ago
    You realise new twitter is literally censoring things that are a mild inconvenience to the Boss - who happens to be the new President-for-life buddy?
  - astrange 2y ago
    They were censoring leaked pictures of Hunter Biden's penis. You can't run a service where it shows every single post that someone wants to put up, even if they're "legal". It'd get full of spam, offend everyone so much they leave, or just force everyone to see Hunter Biden's penis.
- pcf 2y ago
  The reason it's increasingly an "echo chamber" is because liberals are so offended by actual free speech that they stopped posting there. To blame conservatives for this development is illogical.
- randomdata 2y ago
  > it has increasingly become a right wing echo chamber and place to promote conspiracy theories. In what way? I still only see the very same industry-focused information that I first started using Twitter for. If anything, X has improved in pulling in information from more industry players than I was seeing before, so I consider it to be an even more compelling product now. But perhaps that same algorithm improvement is what you ultimately mean? As in, that X has become better at finding the information you want to see, so if you have an interest in "right wing" or conspiracy content then it is a greater likelihood of it exposing you to that than the Twitter of yore did?
  - dktoao 2y ago
    Make a burner account and log in to it. You will see what the parent comment is talking about.
    - randomdata 2y ago
      Implying that is how people use X? Continually creating new burner accounts, not giving "the algorithm" what it needs to provide what they really want to see? Seems unlikely. I suspect those who complain it is a "right wing" echo chamber are using longstanding accounts and actually engaging with "right wing" content, which trains "the algorithm" of their preference to see more of the same. Anecdotally, those I know who complain of "right wing" echo chambers are also the first people to gorge on "right wing" media to see what "they" are up to.
  - wsintra2022 2y ago
    Just yesterday the Guardian newspaper put out a statement saying they will no longer be posting to x/twitter cause it’s gone down the toilet. https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/13/the-guardian-no-longer-post-on-x-twitter-elon-musk https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/13/the-guardian-n...
    - randomdata 2y ago
      Interesting that they felt their content added to right wing conspiracies. Good on them for realizing and backing away, I guess, but won't they still feed other platforms? It does not appear that they are willing to halt production on that realization. Not to mention that this encourages others to still share their content on X, defeating the whole intent of no longer posting... The story doesn't add up. On second thought, this is clearly an advertisement disguised as news trying to latch onto searches for Twitter/X. They are no doubt backing away, but only because nobody wants to read widely published news on X in the first place. X's niche is in providing a place for everyday people to get their own personal news out, like the aforementioned industry practitioners sharing what they are doing in industry.

Since Musk's acquisition of Twitter, it has increasingly become a right wing echo chamber and place to promote conspiracy theories. And Alex Jones' InfoWars and Elon Musk's Twitter are both likely to show you advertisements for supplements of dubious effectiveness and other generally scammy products. So yeah, Jones fits right in there.

wordofx 2y ago
It really hasn’t.
- sjsdaiuasgdia 2y ago
  My experience disagrees with yours, I suppose. To me, as a casual user of the platform, that has been the trend. I've been visiting less because of it.
- bbor 2y ago
  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65246394 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65246394 there are both in-depth studies and anecdotal evidence that suggest hate speech has been growing under Mr Musk's tenure. https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/data-shows-x-suspending-far-fewer-users-hate-speech/728136/ https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/data-shows-x-suspendin... Data Shows X Is Suspending Far Fewer Users for Hate Speech And, finally: Alex Jones was unbanned. That alone is proof of rising support for hate speech. He's literally been proven to be a lying provocateur in court, it doesn't get much clearer than that
wyager 2y ago
So on the one hand you had Twitter, where the impression you would have had in the first few days of November is that Trump was probably going to win the election. On the other hand you had most other platforms like Reddit, with relatively heavy-handed moderation, where the impression you would have had in the first few days of November is that Trump was probably going to lose the election. So when you want to make a prior judgement on an extremely consequential outcome, which a posteriori was not even close, and one information ecosystem gives you the right answer, and most of the other information ecosystems give you the wrong answer, which information ecosystems do you classify as "echo chambers"? It's possible that this was just a fluke, but it should certainly make you update your priors on which ecosystems provide a more representative sample of base reality.
- bandyaboot 2y ago
  If I confidently declare ahead of time the result of a coin flip, I may turn out to be correct, but my confidence was still unjustified. And furthermore, my getting it right would not necessitate a “fluke”. I’m on Reddit a fair bit and while it’s difficult to know the overall biases of the greater community based on what I see individually, I don’t have a lot of trouble believing that there was a bias toward a particular desired result. But, I honestly didn’t see much in the way of a bias one way or the other in the expected result. I mostly saw a lot of anxiety over not knowing what result to expect.
  - lazyeye 2y ago
    Elections are not remotely a "coin flip" though?
    - jkubicek 2y ago
      Well sure, but the predicting the results of this particular election was very much a coin flip.
      - lazyeye 2y ago
        I disagree. The media makes it seem like a coin flip, but the prediction markets where people are focused on making money was accurate. This is compared to the media who are more interested in pushing lies and ideology.
        threeseed 2y ago
        The prediction markets can be influenced by governments, companies etc who have no desire to make short term money.
        itsoktocry 2y ago
        But polling results cannot. Right.
tailrecursion 2y ago
I take it that left wingers feel that "community notes" isn't effective or sufficient to combat right wing beliefs that are wrong? The people on the right seem satisfied for now that they can "combat misinformation with more information". (That's a misquote by the way, I believe he said better information, not more. On second thought, he may have said it both ways.) Has anyone discussed why the right believes this can work, and the left doesn't?
- Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
  Bullshit Asymmetry Principle[0] always applies. By the time Community Notes has appeared, tens or even hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of people will have seen the misinformation. Even once Community Notes have appeared, many won't read them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_asymmetry_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_asymmetry_principle
  - elektrontamer 2y ago
    Why are we so worried about adults reading incorrect information? Once they eventually find the info was wrong they'll be more sceptical of that source. We know policing speech doesn't work, whoever does the policing introduces their own biases, this was clear as day with the hunter laptop story and how the goverment put pressure on social media companies to supress it.
    - macintux 2y ago
      > Once they eventually find the info was wrong they'll be more sceptical of that source. If they’ve internalized/amplified it, they’ll believe the source, and disregard the contradictory information. This has been well-established over the last, oh, 10 years. Facts are irrelevant if you can choose your own sources.
      - the_optimist 2y ago
        This “sounds smart” and I’m sure it circulates well in conversation. In practice, no. The point of “facts” is to identify useful truths that guide decisions. When some portion of the distribution of people identify misalignment, which is inevitable—not optional—then they will true up.
itsoktocry 2y ago
You realize old Twitter was literally censoring things they knew to be true but politically damaging, right? Or are you still operating in 2022? Twitter is right wing because your country (and the world) are shifting right. Sorry.
- aredox 2y ago
  You realise new twitter is literally censoring things that are a mild inconvenience to the Boss - who happens to be the new President-for-life buddy?
- astrange 2y ago
  They were censoring leaked pictures of Hunter Biden's penis. You can't run a service where it shows every single post that someone wants to put up, even if they're "legal". It'd get full of spam, offend everyone so much they leave, or just force everyone to see Hunter Biden's penis.
pcf 2y ago
The reason it's increasingly an "echo chamber" is because liberals are so offended by actual free speech that they stopped posting there. To blame conservatives for this development is illogical.
randomdata 2y ago
> it has increasingly become a right wing echo chamber and place to promote conspiracy theories. In what way? I still only see the very same industry-focused information that I first started using Twitter for. If anything, X has improved in pulling in information from more industry players than I was seeing before, so I consider it to be an even more compelling product now. But perhaps that same algorithm improvement is what you ultimately mean? As in, that X has become better at finding the information you want to see, so if you have an interest in "right wing" or conspiracy content then it is a greater likelihood of it exposing you to that than the Twitter of yore did?
- dktoao 2y ago
  Make a burner account and log in to it. You will see what the parent comment is talking about.
  - randomdata 2y ago
    Implying that is how people use X? Continually creating new burner accounts, not giving "the algorithm" what it needs to provide what they really want to see? Seems unlikely. I suspect those who complain it is a "right wing" echo chamber are using longstanding accounts and actually engaging with "right wing" content, which trains "the algorithm" of their preference to see more of the same. Anecdotally, those I know who complain of "right wing" echo chambers are also the first people to gorge on "right wing" media to see what "they" are up to.
- wsintra2022 2y ago
  Just yesterday the Guardian newspaper put out a statement saying they will no longer be posting to x/twitter cause it’s gone down the toilet. https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/13/the-guardian-no-longer-post-on-x-twitter-elon-musk https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2024/nov/13/the-guardian-n...
  - randomdata 2y ago
    Interesting that they felt their content added to right wing conspiracies. Good on them for realizing and backing away, I guess, but won't they still feed other platforms? It does not appear that they are willing to halt production on that realization. Not to mention that this encourages others to still share their content on X, defeating the whole intent of no longer posting... The story doesn't add up. On second thought, this is clearly an advertisement disguised as news trying to latch onto searches for Twitter/X. They are no doubt backing away, but only because nobody wants to read widely published news on X in the first place. X's niche is in providing a place for everyday people to get their own personal news out, like the aforementioned industry practitioners sharing what they are doing in industry.