Twitter

[JWags85]

The minute they kill the chronological timeline and force me to the algo I'm gone.

IG tries stuff like that all the time, people complain, and they acquiesce.  I imagine Twitter would be the same

[real chili 83]

Wow Bezos owns WaPo now Elon with Twitter, does Zuckerburg buy MUScoop next???

Danged Oligarchs.  What's next, we invade Canada?

[Hards Alumni]

Danged Oligarchs.  What's next, we invade Canada?

Brother, we must liberate the Québécois people.  They have been oppressed under the rule of the Anglo speaking Canadian 'government' for far too long.  TO ARMS!!!

[Jockey]

Yup. Terrible for discourse. The type that only believes in free speech when it's what he wants to hear.

Wasn't arguing one way or the other. Just stating what he wants to do.

'Free speech' (pro or con) by a private company is much different than the Free Speech which is protected by the constitution.

[brewcity77]

Wasn't arguing one way or the other. Just stating what he wants to do.

'Free speech' (pro or con) by a private company is much different than the Free Speech which is protected by the constitution.

Everyone will now have the 'freedom' to spread disinformation, just like Musk intends.

[GB Warrior]

I'm just not ready for Twitter to become toxic

[MU_B]

I'm just not ready for Twitter to become toxic

lol

[PBRme]

Danged Oligarchs.  What's next, we invade Canada?

Don't we already own Canada

[Jockey]

Everyone will now have the 'freedom' to spread disinformation, just like Musk intends.

Can we yell "Fire" in the theater? It's just disinformation.

[tower912]

Oligarch. 

[muwarrior69]

Everyone will now have the 'freedom' to spread disinformation, just like Musk intends.

Just like the NY Post was banned on Twitter for their story of the Lap top from Hell for violating some "hacking" rule for 2 weeks. Even the NY Times which called it "Russian disinformation" which in and of itself was disinformation but never got banned from Twitter now says the lap top is real.  Twitter should not decide what is mis/disinformation but leave that up to the subscriber to determine that for themselves.

We'll see if Musk is a man of his word.

[Uncle Rico]

Just like the NY Post was banned on Twitter for their story of the Lap top from Hell for violating some "hacking" rule for 2 weeks. Even the NY Times which called it "Russian disinformation" which in and of itself was disinformation but never got banned from Twitter now says the lap top is real.  Twitter should not decide what is mis/disinformation but leave that up to the subscriber to determine that for themselves.

We'll see if Musk is a man of his word.

Twitter can control the content however it sees fit. 

[muwarrior69]

Twitter can control the content however it sees fit.

I agree, but please don't say they were controlling misinformation when they were not.

[Uncle Rico]

I agree, but please don't say they were controlling misinformation when they were not.

Man, have you come to right place for disinformation

[jesmu84]

We'll see how this turns out.

- Any platform that has tried to be completely without moderation has turned into *hit quickly.

- I don't believe Musk is truly a "free speech absolutist"

- oligarchs buying communication networks is a bad idea

- disinformation is a problem. But relying on "fact checkers" is also a bad idea

- Musk may have values he wishes Twitter to demonstrate, but ultimately this is likely just a capitalist venture for him

- everyone loves when "their side" is in control

[StillAWarrior]

We'll see how this turns out.

I agree. I'm not very involved with Twitter anyway, so I'm not overly concerned by this. I'm curious to see how it all plays out.

- everyone loves when "their side" is in control

Also agree. I have very little confidence that I know much at all about which "side" Musk is on.

[Uncle Rico]

I agree. I'm not very involved with Twitter anyway, so I'm not overly concerned by this. I'm curious to see how it all plays out.


Also agree. I have very little confidence that I know much at all about which "side" Musk is on.

He's on his side

[Uncle Rico]

We'll see how this turns out.

- Any platform that has tried to be completely without moderation has turned into *hit quickly.

- I don't believe Musk is truly a "free speech absolutist"

- oligarchs buying communication networks is a bad idea

- disinformation is a problem. But relying on "fact checkers" is also a bad idea

- Musk may have values he wishes Twitter to demonstrate, but ultimately this is likely just a capitalist venture for him

- everyone loves when "their side" is in control

There is no way forward for Twitter without any type of moderation.  Things may not be moderated the same but there will still be moderation.

[Merit Matters]

Smoking a cigar enjoying the premium for my shares and the exploding heads all around the past couple of weeks. Gotta take the victories as they come 

[muwarrior69]

Ouch! Possible name change from Twitter to "Titter".

https://nypost.com/2022/04/25/these-are-elon-musks-possible-plans-for-twitter-after-44-billion-deal/

[GB Warrior]

Twitter tells me today is my 13th anniversary on that hellsite; fitting that it's also the day it died

[4everwarriors]

MTGA, hey?

[jesmu84]

MTGA, hey?

At what point in time do you believe Twitter was great?

[MU82]

From NYT finance and business writer Andrew Ross Sorkin:

Musk has said he wants more "free speech" and less moderation on Twitter. What will that mean in practice? More bullying? More lewd commentary and images? More misinformation?

Perhaps a window into Musk's approach is a tweet he sent on Friday making fun of Bill Gates with a crude reference to anatomy, as a way to get even with Gates, who had admitted to betting against shares of Tesla.

Which raised this question: When conspiracy theorists falsely posted that Gates was paying to develop Covid vaccines to implant chips in people, Twitter down-ranked the content and added fact-check notices. If Musk were running Twitter then, would he have left those posts up to needle his nemesis?

The deal will give Musk enormous influence over politicians, celebrities and the media, with the ability to platform and de-platform them at will.

But some will have sway over him, too, in ways that could distort what the public sees on Twitter. For example, Twitter has no presence in China. Musk does: A huge chunk of Tesla's growth is dependent on that country. What happens when Chinese officials tell him to remove content from Twitter that they find objectionable?

Back here in the U.S., Musk's SpaceX business relies, in large part, on contracts with the Defense Department. His Tesla business is in discussions with the U.S. government about a national charging station infrastructure. His Boring Company, which digs tunnels, relies on governments for contracts. If a politician that controls the purse strings for any of Musk's companies were to publish misinformation, would Musk remove it?

There are no answers to these questions just yet. But we will find out soon. Likely on Twitter.

[GB Warrior]

Jack has spoken (and has been paid for complicity) https://twitter.com/jack/status/1518772756069773313?t=Vv5NdwrC8ldoNrL3azwjQw&s=19