3 ms·

I think Twitter is partly responsible for destroying his mind, with the rest of the job being done by drugs. It's an inherently toxic format. It promotes incoh

by api 2y ago

I think Twitter is partly responsible for destroying his mind, with the rest of the job being done by drugs. It's an inherently toxic format. It promotes incoherent, contradiction-ridden, emotionally-driven, short-attention-span meme-think. IMHO Bluesky is no better, which is why I'm not there. It's the same format, an incoherent soup of sound bites competing to emotionally trigger you into amplifying them. This format is the kind of thing a mad scientist would design with the explicit goal of rotting the human mind. The good thing about books and longer-form works... even things as long as Reddit and HN comments... is that they can encapsulate complete thoughts that are connected to other thoughts. Building systems of thinking is how humans reason coherently about the world. Meme soup reduces us to some kind of animal level of grunts and short-horizon reactions but with language. It's gross. I've been calling "social" media companies in general "the tobacco companies of the mind" for years.

hsuduebc2 2y ago
I'm not using it for the same reason. It tailors the content to trigger emotional reactions-usually negative ones. I'd often leave X feeling like people are just evil, idiotic creatures. That's not healthy. Kinda ironic that the so-called prodigy of our generation is letting himself get manipulated by his own platform's algorithm-promoting garbage to himself just to better manipulate others.
rchaud 2y ago
Being radicalized by the Internet isn't an excuse for teenage Isis fighters, nor is it one for a 55 year old man.
- disqard 2y ago
  I get where you're coming from (and I've rolled my eyes at the "video games cause violence" line of reasoning myself). However, there is much wisdom in McLuhan's "we become what we behold" -- and consuming too much "social media" turns one into a performative puppet. Twitter is the distilled version of this (Jaron Lanier called it "Twitter Poisoning"). If Elon Husk huffing Twitter 24/7 while owning Twitter isn't a case of "getting high on your own supply", then I don't know what is.
infecto 2y ago
I strongly agree with this argument. Both sides are equally guilty of fueling a culture of baseless accusations. While it's a broader issue across the Western world, it's especially pronounced in the U.S. It's reached a point where words have lost their weight and meaning.
- acdha 2y ago
  Saying “both sides” is free PR for the worst side. They’ve never been close since the turn of the century when the right-wing reaction to 9/11 included people rationalizing vile smears against their political opponents and it’s just become more and more unbalanced now, especially when you consider the power disparity.
  - infecto 2y ago
    Was just pointing out a general issue, not taking sides. Can we stick to the topic—rage-bait memes on Twitter and Bluesky—and leave politics out of it for now? It’s an awful drag especially when we get into these dull statements “the other side is worse!!!”
- api 2y ago
  It's the algorithm, not any "side." The algorithm amplifies the divisive, triggering, and absurd, because trash maximizes engagement.
  - infecto 2y ago
    So people joined blue sky because of an algorithm? My point is that the content on these various platforms are low quality and fuel the fire and has ultimately created low quality arguments and ideas.
numpad0 2y ago
I think the case with Elon Musk was skill issue than toxicity, like how pre-TV person would find modern cable TV infomercials irresistible. Are infomercials toxic? maybe? Is banning them useful? maybe - can you find them addictive, as a post-TV individual? I can't, and I can't get schezophrenic like those perpetually enraged Twitter users, either. I think it's just that those people, including Musk, didn't have the new form or literacy, a stronger grounding to the reality, required to be online. Twitter/Bluesky architecture itself, IMO, is about 10^2-5 less toxic than anything before it.
tim333 2y ago
He's definitely gone a bit wackier sounding since buying twitter. His idea of free speech is anything goes with the idea it leads to truth, but it allows people to post any old made up nonsense which seems to lead to weirdness.

by api 2y ago

hsuduebc2 2y ago

I'm not using it for the same reason. It tailors the content to trigger emotional reactions-usually negative ones. I'd often leave X feeling like people are just evil, idiotic creatures. That's not healthy. Kinda ironic that the so-called prodigy of our generation is letting himself get manipulated by his own platform's algorithm-promoting garbage to himself just to better manipulate others.

rchaud 2y ago

Being radicalized by the Internet isn't an excuse for teenage Isis fighters, nor is it one for a 55 year old man.

disqard 2y ago
I get where you're coming from (and I've rolled my eyes at the "video games cause violence" line of reasoning myself). However, there is much wisdom in McLuhan's "we become what we behold" -- and consuming too much "social media" turns one into a performative puppet. Twitter is the distilled version of this (Jaron Lanier called it "Twitter Poisoning"). If Elon Husk huffing Twitter 24/7 while owning Twitter isn't a case of "getting high on your own supply", then I don't know what is.

infecto 2y ago

I strongly agree with this argument. Both sides are equally guilty of fueling a culture of baseless accusations. While it's a broader issue across the Western world, it's especially pronounced in the U.S. It's reached a point where words have lost their weight and meaning.

acdha 2y ago
Saying “both sides” is free PR for the worst side. They’ve never been close since the turn of the century when the right-wing reaction to 9/11 included people rationalizing vile smears against their political opponents and it’s just become more and more unbalanced now, especially when you consider the power disparity.
- infecto 2y ago
  Was just pointing out a general issue, not taking sides. Can we stick to the topic—rage-bait memes on Twitter and Bluesky—and leave politics out of it for now? It’s an awful drag especially when we get into these dull statements “the other side is worse!!!”
api 2y ago
It's the algorithm, not any "side." The algorithm amplifies the divisive, triggering, and absurd, because trash maximizes engagement.
- infecto 2y ago
  So people joined blue sky because of an algorithm? My point is that the content on these various platforms are low quality and fuel the fire and has ultimately created low quality arguments and ideas.

numpad0 2y ago

I think the case with Elon Musk was skill issue than toxicity, like how pre-TV person would find modern cable TV infomercials irresistible. Are infomercials toxic? maybe? Is banning them useful? maybe - can you find them addictive, as a post-TV individual? I can't, and I can't get schezophrenic like those perpetually enraged Twitter users, either. I think it's just that those people, including Musk, didn't have the new form or literacy, a stronger grounding to the reality, required to be online. Twitter/Bluesky architecture itself, IMO, is about 10^2-5 less toxic than anything before it.

tim333 2y ago

He's definitely gone a bit wackier sounding since buying twitter. His idea of free speech is anything goes with the idea it leads to truth, but it allows people to post any old made up nonsense which seems to lead to weirdness.