Actually, I think 1/2 or more of America would doubt that it is working. A sample on twitter recently said 76% prefer a Musk buy. Don’t know how/why anyone thinks that things are working in terms of moderation. Shutting down things you don’t agree with and silencing critics isn’t moderation, and that’s the reason Musk wants to buy Twitter and some are losing their minds.
( This survey certainly could be a subgroup that leans in a particular direction). But it does means that there are people interested in real change and a different direction. @OhiBro hits the nail on the head. The only ones who are afraid of change are the ones who have been using algorithms to game the system and silence their critics. They are unable to let debates out and arguments stand on their own. I’m not afraid of the nonsense on Twitter. Bring it on.
I don’t think moderation is at all like self driving. LOL.
That’s the technical problem with content moderation of any kind - it’s not scalable. If humans are doing it it’s a slow process and content will not be quickly removed. Eventually, software will be able to quickly respond to video, audio, text, and images.
But, technical issues aside I can’t understand why Musk or Google, or any other person/company would want to get involved in the social media space requiring them to determine what is acceptable and what it not, who can post and who can not. It seem to me to be a huge PIA. Certainly, Musk does not need this to make money - he could do so using much easier methods.
Agree it can be done using a variety of methods including tech/AI/humans and 100 other ways. Musk has repeatedly said he’s interested in Twitter for free speech reasons. It is a HUGE PIA. And he has more money than anyone on earth. Honestly, I’m surprised he doesn’t just build his own social media hub. f I had to guess, I think he intends to be a PIA to those who like to game the system in their favor. He knows this is driving them insane and he enjoys tweaking them.
We’ll find out this week what happens. Should be Waiting for Plan B.
Me neither, and that is probably why Twitter will have difficulty finding a so-called White Knight. Someone mentioned Mark Cuban up thread…no way he’d want that headache, which would also hurt his TV persona.
That’s not at all true. Tesla employs (or, more accurately, pays as subcontractors) nearly as many humans to do data labeling for FSD as Twitter does for content moderation (approaching 2000 in both cases).
I’m not even sure that Twitter is much of an investment. “Conservative” or “liberal,” the vast majority of the “tweets” are unintelligent. If you try to bring a different point of view than the majority of tweets, you just get ganged-up on. I learned from experience that brain cells can grow back if I use social media less.
A step in the right direction for free and open speech. One side won’t be able to use the algorithm to their advantage any longer.
I think Elon Musk’s tweet: “I hope my worst critics remain on Twitter because that is what free speech means” sums it up nicely.
The question is will some people be able to stand a system in which the algorithm isn’t rigged? Will they publish it? What will they do next?
I’m glad I made some money on this, but more importantly I’m glad someone finally stood up for free speech.
That’s the great thing about free speech. Sometimes I offend other people, and sometimes they offend me. That’s OK because we get over it and learn something. Censoring is such a fallacy, because, how can one determine where the truth is if we are not allowed to see the other side of the coin?
Ahh, wise words. If everyone understood that free speech doesn’t include censoring of words/people you don’t like, we’d be in a better place. I think there are enough people who know that you have to allow both sides to speak or you have a real issue and can drift into some very dangerous places.
But I’m skeptical on how Musk can monetize his investment in twitter. To do that, he needs more daily users, i.e., eyeballs and clicks. I think I read somewhere that journalists comprise 25% of frequent tweets. (I assume that the journalism crowd is not a target market for advertisers.) So how does new management attract millions of new users? Yes, some people will quit twitter out of protest of the new owners, but that maybe a legit tradeoff to get more users.
edited to add, sry, catcher, didn’t mean to respond to you, my post was meant to be a general reply to the thread.
I’ll go back to my original premise, I think Musk doesn’t care if this is a good business deal or not. He did it for other reasons, mainly free speech. That’s why I bought. That’s why the stock didn’t tank even in the face of uncertainty. The bankers who came through looked at the financials. Maybe some of them even thought about free speech. In any case, it’s a massive financial deal but it’s a bigger societal deal as it will reverberate and rebalance. Even Jack Dorsey supported this bid. You can look up why, ps. not financial.
Well, he said he plans to have the blue checks pay $2/month. That would monetize things quickly. He could bring in lots more advertising. That could go either way. He could set up subgroups where people pay to join ( like sub stack).
understand, he has lotsa ideas. I’m just skeptical enough will pay $2/mo to make it worthwhile. I think Netflix is the canary in the coal mine. Folks are getting tapped out with subscriptions, IMO. Substack is a niche, just like twitter is today. Think about it this way, Facebook has 60% penetration in teh US. Twitter has 10%.
Waiting for Plan B.