Twitter / X was much better before 2015 or so. Less algorithmic influence back then - all it had was your chronological feed, and a simple ordered "Trends" section next to your feed, which you could easily tailor based on your city, country, etc. There was no "What's Happening", no "For You", etc. The presentation was simple and clean. The community was more fun and chill. Not as much hate or divisiveness. Less engagement farming and ragebait. Things that went viral felt more organic and genuine. That said, there's always going to be at least a little bit of engagement farming on any social media or forum. But it got really bad on Twitter after Elon took over a few years ago and allowed people to monetize their tweets. Anyone with half-a-brain knew that his decision would lead to a sharp rise in that. While there were plenty of politicians on Twitter back then, the place felt much less politically charged before 2015. Prior to Elon, the "blue checkmark" served a useful, meaningful purpose. The place felt freer in its early days compared to now, even with Musk's "free speech" bloviating. Twitter got worse between 2015 - 2022 and MUCH worse after Elon took over. Most of his ideas and changes were mediocre to abysmal. Linda Yaccarino is just a figurehead "CEO". Community Notes is a good feature (and that was around before Elon took over), but other than that, meh. It's still very useful as a source of news - but it's gotten harder to avoid the junk, AI bots, fake stuff, etc. Most social media platforms are at their best during their early years of service. They usually decline in quality after the company IPOs or otherwise gets more aggressive in their monetization strategy to make the platform profitable.
The loss of chronological tweets is an important point. Twitter was fantastic for breaking news and I felt like I could "catch up" on what I'd missed simply by scrolling down the feed. Then they took an algorithmic approach to the feed and it lost that timeliness edge that made it feel so crucial. Sure I always saw "new" content, but it was harder to follow events as they were happening. I had to delete my account for own sanity. It was becoming harder for me to focus on books and long news pieces becauseI was so used to reading 140-character tweets. I had to reclaim my ability to think and deleting Twitter has helped a lot.
I love a good analogy. Nice one! So let's stick with it. Even if I don't know how to fly a helicopter or even am a passenger in a helicopter, I can still suffer the negative consequences because a helicopter could crash on my head while I'm minding my own business. A lot of folks say they avoid social media, which is fine. But social media still imparts negative (and positive) consequences on the world that impacts us all. On my soap box, people need to acknowledge that you may not use twitter but twitter still impacts you, like it or not. Sorta like cyber security. You may not put your credit card online but that doesn't mean your SS# or CC hasn't made it to the dark web without you ever being the agent that causes it. So somebody mentioned above that the platforms, like twitter, are simply a free market / free speech platform and don't bear the responsibility for what happens there. That I disagree with. They know full well that their platforms are a willing enabler and bear, at least, some responsibility for the hyper drive that they've created. /soapbox. Again, probably more of a D&D discussion. Back on point, Twitter sucks. Kidding, I know twitter is an amazing platform that many people find useful. Not me.
Yeah I think we're just too far apart on this one too ever see eye to eye. While I acknowledge that both benefit and harm can come from ANY right of the people, I believe more harm comes from the infringement upon those rights than any benefit that could come from restriction of those rights..... and you came out in favor of abolishing the Bill of Rights. That said, I'll try to bridge the gap. What I see as the flaw in your ideology is that I'm certain in your mind the person who gets to decide what is truth and what is haram is someone you agree with.... but would you still support criminalizing speech if it was Alex Jones or Donald Trump who got to decide what was truth and what was against the law to say?
You say we are too far apart but, IMO, we are having two different conversations. I'm not talking about free speech and truth. Jones and Trump can, and should, say what they want. I support the KKK to exist. I support Fox news to exist and make their money. There are lines crossed with defamation and slander, for example, but I'll let the courts deal with that. My point is Twitter, and other platforms, are not like placing an advertisement in the classified section. It's fundamentally and exponentially different. Just like a Glock is not the same thing as a stingray missile. Both are high speed projectiles that inflict damage. That's where the similarities end. It was agreed long ago that they are NOT both protected under the 2nd Amendment. Twitter has algorithms that, and without your consent or knowledge, unnaturally amplifies perspectives that they feel will draw you in. They call it "engagement" but another term could be "addiction." Therein lies the nuanced difference and that nuance is the money shot. It's not about free speech or free will. It's about manipulation, without consent. Similar to cigarette makers that intentionally manipulated the nicotine content, which is flavorless, to make their products more addictive. That was found to be illegal in court. I think this conversation is a defense of the 1st Amendment, not an affront. I'd argue that massive power entities that manipulate or control "We The People" goes against the bedrock of what this country was founded on. The 1st Amendment was intended for "We The People", not for large multi-national companies to profit off the backs of "We The People". No taxation without representation. Back on point, twitter still sucks.
What's interesting, I saw a study that very few people's opinions are changed by hearing other people yack on social media. The biggest effect seems to be that the author of the message, and those that agree with the other and chose to comment, are the one who's opinions are hardened. The reader that doesn't interact is rarely swayed. So it seems the only mind that gets changed, is your own. Now that I just said that, it just occurred to me how right I am.
I wrote out a ridiculously lengthy response to this, but I realized it was not the appropriate venue for the conversation and that while I find it interesting, this is a conversation that could go on for weeks without being finished, so for the sake of not fully derailing things, I just deleted it. Suffice it to say that I believe there are fairly insurmountable legal and moral issues with what you advocate for. When you are upset that someone engaged in defamation via mass texts, you can't hold the phone company responsible. They are, in fact, protected. If there is actual defamation, there are legal remedies for that....you sue the person who said it or wrote it. Has nothing at all to do with any social media platform that may have incidentally hosted the defamatory content for a time no different than the phone company who transmitted defamatory content via text messaging services. Also, every single user consents to the content fed to them by the algorithm when they agree to the TOS, it has always been that way essentially across platforms. They are boring, but you should read them sometime.
Twitter only makes sense to me if you want to follow a limited number of select news/sports sources. Otherwise, I have no clue why anyone would use it. Otherwise its a total waste of time and contributing to the dumbing down of the human race.
I never joined Twitter and don’t feel poorer for It. Given how many people repost tweets I already feel get more than enough content from it.
Very ironic statement. Elon's utter and complete lack of awareness often flares out like a blazing sun.
Mark Cuban is a moron. He made his fortune selling his company for 5.7B 25 years ago. his current net worth is estimated to be 6B. He has participated in several grifting schemes, including his most popular, Shark Tank. He has grifted into crypto and NFT's. This isn't a guy who made a several billion dollars and check out. He continued to try to grow his wealth but has utterly failed. Its a safe bet to short whatever he has to say.
Not to make this thread political but the Vance report is here. https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/read-the-jd-vance-dossier https://www.kenklippenstein.com/api/v1/file/fc39e78d-f510-4918-935b-95701be97310.pdf TBH it would be kind of nice if reports like this were made available for each presidential ticket. I have no clue who wrote this report but I would be absolutely amazed if this was from the "Iranian" government. It is extremely well done. Nothing in the report is privileged and confidential like the report labels itself either. It reads like it is opposition political research and it is highly detailed and very well sourced. It would be cool to see one done for Harris and Walz, but a Trump report like this would be like 900,000 pages lol.
Do you have an account? eta: I do not, and every twitter account I look at, like say Super 70's Sports this morning, has the tweets in a jumbled chronological mess 2022, 2020, 2023, 2017, 2023, 2020...
