Elon vs Twitter update: Elon helped America win , Tesla stock through the roof

Jack's failure was that he was an absentee CEO. He was running two companies at the same time and Square was clearly his priority. Twitter was a complete afterthought most of the time. I think the board is really the problem here. It was painfully obvious that Dorsey was focused on Square but the board did nothing about it. You can't have a major social media company that is more or less run without a leader.

 

NY POST can take a hike. Here is the blog without filtering form NY POST.

His principles from his blog:

1. Social media must be resilient to corporate and government control.
2. Only the original author may remove content they produce.
3. Moderation is best implemented by algorithmic choice

Absolutely in agreement with 1. Isn't #3 in conflict with #2? #3 is fine as a first layer but human intervention / exceptions are needed. However much you want it to be, you can't algorithmically get out of this hard problem.

It just happens that the Meta's independent Oversight Board just recently released its ruling and recommendation on Meta's "cross-check" system (exempted certain high-profile users like a major soccer player and Trump from the platform standard rules). Lawfare did an excellent interview with one of the members of that board. Their basic ruling is there is room for a cross-check system that balances business interest with international human rights, but priority for international human rights over business.

Oversight Board | Independent Judgment. Transparency. Legitimacy.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/lawfare...oversight-board-discusses-boards-new-decision

When Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen shared a trove of internal company documents to the Wall Street Journal in 2021, some of the most dramatic revelations concerned the company’s use of a so-called “cross-check” system that, according to the Journal, essentially exempted certain high-profile users from the platform’s usual rules. After the Journal published its report, Facebook—which has since changed its name to Meta—asked the platform’s independent Oversight Board to weigh in on the program. And now, a year later, the Board has finally released its opinion.

On this episode of Arbiters of Truth, our series on the online information ecosystem, Lawfare senior editors Alan Rozenshtein and Quinta Jurecic sat down with Suzanne Nossel, a member of the Oversight Board and the CEO of PEN America. She talked us through the Board’s findings, its criticisms of cross-check, and its recommendations for Meta going forward.

​

 

My interpretation of #3 - Algorithms will be open source and open for 3rd party application. If you want Twitter 1.0 back, find developers who will build it and filter to your hearts content.

 

Don't care about Twitter anymore. I gave up on the initial hope that it would be better. Twitter 2.0 future looks worse with zero transparency, concentrated decision-making to likely 1 guy, a guy that is obsessed with beating down V1 and is probably open to external manipulation.

Alg can't be perfect, so it needs some human intervention and exceptions. Now, the human intervention and exceptions should be completely transparent and not opaque (like it is today at every single social media company) and best if done by a 3rd party that is financially independent of the company. Kind of a pipe dream but...

 

I love Twitter more and more!

 

In 2016 you could join Tinder at 13. It was age restricted and you could join a group between 13-17. So this was "normal". I'm not arguing it was correct, but it was accepted on a "straight" app. So I am trying to determine the outrage about Roth's academic writing in 2016. It seems like it was more about LGBTQ kids, than just kids in general. In 2018, I believe, Tinder changed to 18+

 

Could you only match others in the same age group? Or could 50-year olds set their filter to target the 13-17 group? What about 18-year olds?

 

Is this what was said though? Even Zuckerburg said Facebook was only warned to be on the lookout for "Russian disinformation" the FBI never said anything about Hunter Biden

 

Yes, I think one of the revelations was that they did specifically mention Hunter Biden news might come up and that it is likely disinformation.

 

From what I understand it was just for 13-17 year olds. They were siloed. The article I read said they had to have a Facebook account as well. I didn't do too much of a deep dive into it. But anyone over 18 could not go searching for anyone under 18 with their over 18 account. Now that brings up the point of people over 18 signing up as underage, which Roth's paper was addressing.

 

Okay. I haven't seen that. I may have missed it though. I do know Zuckerberg said in his interview that he does not remember Hunter ever being mentioned.

 

Quit tracking my plane kid...

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/bu...elon-musk-plane-rcna61718?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma

 

Republican proselytizer Elon Musk didn't bother voting in the 2022 midterm elections

 

i wonder how these fraudsters got a checkmark based on a tv character....

 

Continuing in his Trump transformation, Elon is now threatening frivolous legal action against the guy for something he had already said he would allow and is completely legal and public information. Free speech no longer includes re-posting publicly available information from the FAA, it seems.

 

I notice they are banning accounts of people they don't like or disagree with. Post something anti-Musk, and you can be banned from Twitter.

Musk is turning Twitter into Truth Social. I'm curious to see how all this plays out. For now, I suggest people not post anything critical of Musk on Twitter using their main account.

 

They can start their own Twitter.

 

Is he just doing this to troll Musk or is there an actual audience for this information? It does feel stalkerish.

 

It isn't Elon's jet. It is owned by Falcon Landing, Llc. Who knows who is on that plane?