Twitter is better

[jross]

43 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Show us the number of total users?

As of November 6, 2023.

https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1146722/twitter-users-in-the-world

[ThreePointTakedown]

5 minutes ago, jross said:

As of November 6, 2023.

https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1146722/twitter-users-in-the-world

Funny, when I do a similar search. The same website pops up with a graph from November 15, 2023 and the trend is not the same. 2019-24. 

Different take 

How do we square this circle? Are you willing to admit there is a chance you're wrong and Twitter is and will continue to be worse then it was just a few years ago? 

[headshuck]

An opinion column from this rag carries little weight

How about this rag?

CNN - Disney is in trouble. Bob Iger has 5 big problems to solve

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/11/08/media/disney-iger-uncertainty-earnings-preview/index.html

[jross]

2 minutes ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

Are you willing to admit there is a chance you're wrong and Twitter is and will continue to be worse then it was just a few years ago? 

Of course! (admit when wrong and apologize where warranted)

There is no question that X is better (for me) than Twitter, which I measure by my own personal usage and satisfaction. I am willing to pay for X but not for Twitter.

And I will believe that X is worse for you by whatever means you value.

Many corporations have found it is worse for them, as they reduced their advertising spend.  I believe 'worse' for them unspokenly relates to power and manipulation.  I am skeptical about the 'social responsibility champion' speech by corporations whose actions are anything but.  Apple device manufacturing, environment impact, repairability, ... etc.  Or perhaps they, too, are being held prisoner by woke customers and funders.

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, jross said:

Three things I liked about Musk's recent video clips

• Claims that he has achieved more to help the environment than anyone (and he may be right)
• He admits he was wrong about how he worded a tweet (not many people admit when they are wrong)
• He tells companies trying to censor speech to ***duck** off 

Greenwald has more to say.

 

 

A couple things I find hilarious about this post:

There is a whole other thread on here about how EVs are bad for the environment. Which is it? They are bad? They are good? Or does it depend on who is making the claim?

Equating not advertising on Twitter with censoring speech is a ridiculous stretch. I assume you do not advertise on Twitter either, censor.

He did not tell companies trying to censor free speech to F... themselves. He told companies he and his CEO are trying to woo to do business with him to F... themselves.

[ionel]

56 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

A couple things I find hilarious about this post:

There is a whole other thread on here about how EVs are bad for the environment. Which is it? They are bad? They are good? Or does it depend on who is making the claim?

Equating not advertising on Twitter with censoring speech is a ridiculous stretch. I assume you do not advertise on Twitter either, censor.

He did not tell companies trying to censor free speech to F... themselves. He told companies he and his CEO are trying to woo to do business with him to F... themselves.

No one advertises on Twitter anymore.  Its kind of like trying to observe the mysterious pinfall, it just doesn't exist.  

[Plasmodium]

19 minutes ago, ionel said:

No one advertises on Twitter anymore.  Its kind of like trying to observe the mysterious pinfall, it just doesn't exist.  

Reminds me of Yogi Berra refusing a dinner invitation - "Nobody goes there any more.  It is too crowded."

[Wrestleknownothing]

16 minutes ago, ionel said:

No one advertises on Twitter anymore.  Its kind of like trying to observe the mysterious pinfall, it just doesn't exist.  

So everyone is censoring speech? This runs deeper than I realized.

[Plasmodium]

Which platforms are uncensored?   I'm reasonably certain FB, TT, IG, YT and Reddit are censored.  4chan?  As near as I can figure 8chan is essentially gone.  TBH, I can't imagine the hellscape an uncensored platform would morph into.

[Bigbrog]

1 minute ago, Plasmodium said:

Which platforms are uncensored?   I'm reasonably certain FB, TT, IG, YT and Reddit are censored.  4chan?  As near as I can figure 8chan is essentially gone.  TBH, I can't imagine the hellscape an uncensored platform would morph into.

If that was the case, who cares...no one would use it then.  Problem fixed.

[Plasmodium]

1 minute ago, Bigbrog said:

If that was the case, who cares...no one would use it then.  Problem fixed.

Like-minded individuals would use it.  

[jross]

1 hour ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

A couple things I find hilarious about this post:

1. There is a whole other thread on here about how EVs are bad for the environment. Which is it? They are bad? They are good? Or does it depend on who is making the claim?

2. Equating not advertising on Twitter with censoring speech is a ridiculous stretch. I assume you do not advertise on Twitter either, censor.

He did not tell companies trying to censor free speech to F... themselves. He told companies he and his CEO are trying to woo to do business with him to F... themselves.

Just keep flapping and kicking (I kid, I kid)

 

1. Great!  Perhaps we agree that Musk's claim* is not universally accepted.

There is an interesting shift in behavior from an ideology that once praised Musk for his **environmental initiatives... to now targeting some of Musk's environment companies due to his involvement in X.  *Musk's claim: It would be fair to say that, therefore, as the leader of the company I've done more for the environment than any single human on earth.  **Musk Investments: EVs, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage, Interplanetary travel, AI, Global Communication, Reducing traffic congestion.  

This ideology wants the Ministry of Truth back.

This Musk statement was a banger...

• What I care about is the reality of goodness, not the perception of it, and what I see all over the place is people who care about looking good while doing evil.

 

2. Musk said "Are you going to try to blackmail me with money?  Go ***duck** yourself."  

Musk has pointed out before about advertisers (paraphrasing)... "It's totally cool to say that you want your advertising to appear in certain places on Twitter, but it is not cool to say what Twitter will do.  If that means we lose advertising dollars, we lose it. But freedom of speech is paramount."

 

 

Edited November 30, 2023 by jross

[Bigbrog]

2 minutes ago, Plasmodium said:

Like-minded individuals would use it.  

So...this happens on all types of issues.  Do you get to choose which like-minded individuals can group together on social media platforms??  

[Plasmodium]

1 minute ago, Bigbrog said:

So...this happens on all types of issues.  Do you get to choose which like-minded individuals can group together on social media platforms??  

Sort of.  The only absolute guarantee is to opt out.   That'll get you called a "censor", apparently.

[jross]

1 minute ago, Bigbrog said:

So...this happens on all types of issues.  Do you get to choose which like-minded individuals can group together on social media platforms??  

Twitter's old-guard supporters talk about inclusivity and being open to different ideas, but in practice, they are exclusive and silence those who do not agree with them.

#Paradox

[ionel]

34 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

So everyone is censoring speech? This runs deeper than I realized.

Twitter is no more, there is no such thing, its gone by the way of pinfall.  Do some eXtra research. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by ionel

[headshuck]

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, jross said:

Just keep flapping and kicking (I kid, I kid)

 

1. Great!  Perhaps we agree that Musk's claim* is not universally accepted.

There is an interesting shift in behavior from an ideology that once praised Musk for his **environmental initiatives... to now targeting some of Musk's environment companies due to his involvement in X.  *Musk's claim: It would be fair to say that, therefore, as the leader of the company I've done more for the environment than any single human on earth.  **Musk Investments: EVs, Renewable Energy, Energy Storage, Interplanetary travel, AI, Global Communication, Reducing traffic congestion.  

This ideology wants the Ministry of Truth back.

This Musk statement was a banger...

• What I care about is the reality of goodness, not the perception of it, and what I see all over the place is people who care about looking good while doing evil.

 

2. Musk said "Are you going to try to blackmail me with money?  Go ***duck** yourself."  

Musk has pointed out before about advertisers (paraphrasing)... "It's totally cool to say that you want your advertising to appear in certain places on Twitter, but it is not cool to say what Twitter will do.  If that means we lose advertising dollars, we lose it. But freedom of speech is paramount."

 

 

It isn't about freedom of speech. It is about actions having consequences.

He tweets in support of anti-Semitic ideas on Twitter.com (happy, @ionel?) and then he is surprised that advertisers do not want to be associated with that activity. Of course, he cannot say it is his own fault that he is killing twitter.com so he says it is the advertisers fault for pulling their ads from a company whose owner uses its product to support anti-Semitic ideas. Then he attempts to dress the whole thing up as freedom of speech or censorship. And some people are stupid enough to fall for that thinnest of argu,ents.

He clearly has freedom of speech and he clearly has no censors, not an internal censor nor a CEO that is empowered to stop him from doing stupid things that harms the business he owns,. As evidence of this I point to all of his many, many, many tweets. He calls people pedophiles, files lawsuits to stop people from publishing reports about his product, and any number of other self-inflicted wounds. But it is never his fault. It is some evil cabal out to get him.

And when he tells the very people he blames for ruining his company by refusing to buy his product they can F... themselves, how is anyone surprised that they do not spend money on his product? Why would they ever at this point? He is just too toxic a presence.

Then you get guys like @headshuck who think it is war. The stupidity of that take is hard to quantify, and I spend all day, every day quantifying things. These are customers, sorry, were customers, who he is, in theory, trying to win business from, not enemies attacking him. 

[ThreePointTakedown]

1 hour ago, Bigbrog said:

So...this happens on all types of issues.  Do you get to choose which like-minded individuals can group together on social media platforms??  

Yes. That's the point. Although no one has found a way to make it financially feasible. Just like anything, those that are left out will try to tear it down. Every niche will be filled when and where they can. 

 

[ThreePointTakedown]

2 hours ago, jross said:

Twitter's old-guard supporters talk about inclusivity and being open to different ideas, but in practice, they are exclusive and silence those who do not agree with them.

#Paradox

There is an argument that we've  tackled before about where and when is it appropriate to limit information to the public. When the government or a government organization limits, by force, the dissemination of information(other than that which would or could be considered dangerous, pornographic, or in other ways objectionable) it is censorship and/or a violation of free speech. ei banning certain books from public libraries. 

When a business does it, its neither censorship or a violation of your free speech. You have no right to Twitter. If they want to make money by plastering swastikas all over, they can. Its been done before. If they choose not to, kick rocks. 

That you're trying to frame it as 'they just don't like the ideas' is a bit of a stretch. That their economic policy is different is not the issue. Its wanting hatful views to be considered run-of-the-mill because the only other places they can spout those ideas are tiny corners of nowhere and they want more exposure. Dislike doesn't begin to describe it. Dangerous, yes. 

If we are talking about economic policy or how best to provide free health care to everyone or the best way to pave over pools so the less fortunate can't enjoy them, then sure lets talk. But your argument seems like a pretty typical straw man and an twisting of the real issue. 

Regardless of whether or not its censorship. If racists and white nationalists are happy about the direction twitter is going, I'm skeptical of someone who agrees with them. Businesses have at least the sense not to wade too deep into that pool. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by ThreePointTakedown

[mspart]

1 hour ago, ThreePointTakedown said:

When a business does it, its neither censorship or a violation of your free speech. You have no right to Twitter. If they want to make money by plastering swastikas all over, they can. Its been done before. If they choose not to, kick rocks. 

 

And when the government is advising the business of which content should be censored?   Then that becomes part of the question.   And that is what happened as demonstrated by the Twitter files.  

mspart

[jross]

I've seen the pattern, but I didn't know why until now.

 

[jross]

Quote

Linda Yaccarino...

October 27 marks the one-year anniversary of this platform under new ownership and management.

I am incredibly proud of the work our team has been doing to accelerate the future of X.

So let me share with you where we stand today:

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2023/one-year-in

[Paul158]

8 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Disney is on the winning side of the war on Woke.  Ask Meatball Ron's campaign director for confirmation.

Now that is funny.

[Paul158]

4 hours ago, Plasmodium said:

Sort of.  The only absolute guarantee is to opt out.   That'll get you called a "censor", apparently.

To opt out means freedom of choice.