Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Cthulhu 2020]

No, you tried to insist articles about lawsuits and criminality were capable of debunking or disproving claims about something being improper or unethical or a waste of money (Twitter Files & Twitter). You tried to say you've proven "heavy curation" without evidence. You've repeated these claims multiple times, like they become relevant the more your repeat them. You'll have to learn that in a debate, insisting that you've debunked something when you've done nothing of the kind doesn't actually help you win the debate. You "think saying things makes them true," to borrow from what you wrote.

*Yawn*

Of course no evidence would be good enough for you ever. Elon's own lawyers said the claims made by the Twitter Files were false. Matt Taibbi rebuked his own analysis of the Twitter Files after he realized Elon had only given him certain emails. Again, Elon never included the communications between Twitter and Trump which we know exist but Elon conveniently never handed them over to Taibbi. And as Endus pointed out nothing in the Twitter files ever showed what you claim to begin with. There were requests for content moderation from Biden's team and that's all.

If you want to talk unethical, let's talk about how even the Twitter files told us that Trump's team requested that Twitter go outside of its own rules to ban people Trump didn't like, shall we? But that only hurts your overall narrative that there was some kind of impropriety between Twitter and Biden.

I've provided sources and evidence for my claims to the effect. You've provided nothing. Zip. Zilch. There's no scholarly article in an academic journal that will ever be made about the Twitter files because of course there won't be.

This all circles back to the fact that you'll believe Daddy Elon no matter what without ever questioning the veracity of his claims, while ignoring the word of anyone else. You're bias. You're wrong.

And again, you are once more demonstrating that conservative will never debate in good faith thus why it's a waste of time debating them. You don't follow the rules of debate. If Elon's own lawyers aren't a good enough source of information for you then nothing will be. I've supported my claims with sources. You've not provided a single link in this thread ever. You just pull words out of your ass and pass them as true. So put up or shut up. Literally everyone else in this thread is laughing at your hilariously untrue stance on this, and it's effectively pushing conspiracy which is against forum rules at this point.

[Ausr]

Why not....... and I know this is a very fucking complicated thing to think....... but why not ban those individuals instead of closing the thread?

Hot take. That would be doing their volunteer jobs.

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/statu...74812761358336

In related news, both Elon and his VC buddy David Sacks continue promoting disinformation on the regular while refusing to correct themselves or learn from their mistakes.

These people are deeply stupid, deeply dishonest, and garbage human beings.

[s_bushido]

These people are deeply stupid, deeply dishonest, and garbage human beings.

Makes me wonder how many countries we don't have troops stationed in in some capacity. I always assumed we had some sort of military presence in most places, given that whole "world police" nonsense.

[SAY HER NAME]

https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/statu...74812761358336

In related news, both Elon and his VC buddy David Sacks continue promoting disinformation on the regular while refusing to correct themselves or learn from their mistakes.

These people are deeply stupid, deeply dishonest, and garbage human beings.

I love the community notes feature tho

[Endus]

https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/statu...74812761358336

In related news, both Elon and his VC buddy David Sacks continue promoting disinformation on the regular while refusing to correct themselves or learn from their mistakes.

These people are deeply stupid, deeply dishonest, and garbage human beings.

So that "US Civil Defense News" account, that's totally a Russia-backed disinformation propaganda channel, right? It would be funny how fuckin' stupid it is if it weren't working so well because so many people are too fuckin' gullible and can't tell propaganda from reality.

[Endus]

How can they now? Musk obliterated Twitter's their ability to decipher truth from lies.

You can't rely on a corporate entity to make the distinction. You shouldn't be relying on anyone. Critical thinking and analysis. The basic idea that "just because you saw it on TV/the Internet doesn't make it true".

Too many people leap to "this confirms my prejudices so I'm done checking!" because they're ignorant morons. That isn't the disinfo people's fault; they were morons before they saw shit on Twitter.

[Egomaniac]

Right but the ones concerned with truth could just look at the poster for that blue check mark. Now we gotta do research to see if they're a troll. No it wasn't perfect pre-Musk, but we at least had a team at Twitter concerned about propaganda and the harm it causes.

I shouldn't complain though, I don't use Twitter except to watch some Phillies highlights and some of the funnier dumb videos that pop up.

An argument could be made that the blue check made things worse... because people started looking for that instead of fact checking for themselves.

[RaoBurning]

That's fair, I'd only counter by suggesting that since Twitter was clear about vetting for blue checks, you had a reasonable assumption that the person posting was legitimate. Except for Trump and his family I guess LOL.

Now it's just if you want to spend the money.

At worst, the actually real verification system of old confirmed that the person posting was who they claimed to be. That's at least a wide head start in the fact checking process rather than seeing randomnameBunchofnumbers with a blue check pretending to be the USDA or whatever.

Now I just auto-block 99% of people with check marks. Which is easy since they're forced to the top of replies.

[Edge-]

I mean, Facebook and Instagram already have similar content restrictions for non-users.

This isn’t new.

I think that Facebook and Instagram are doing a bit better in terms of their active userbase and finances though. Seems weird to limit access to a product that needs users to access it to display ads to make money, no?

Also, not really. You can still browse both with limitations without an account. I've never had an Insta and while I can't move around it uninhibited I can still easily access that content if I am so inclined.

[Edge-]

I can’t on Instagram. You can only scroll so far down before it blocks the content and asks you to sign in or make an account.

Yes...as I said you can browse with limitations. Limitations you can circumvent if you're so inclined to put in the extra effort. Unlike this new change with Twitter.

[Edge-]

No, like I can’t see anything on Instagram without signing in now. It’s a black screen with just login, saying to sign in/up to view the stuff.

I just went the Instagram page of a company just fine. And popped open one of their posts in a new window just fine. I do not have an account and am not signed in. You don't go to the Instagram front page, you go to the page you want and that still load. You don't try to open a post on the page, you open it in a new tab.

Again as noted, still accessible if you're willing to put in the effort. This does not appear to be the case with Twitter.

[unfilteredJW]

Yeah, I put in some gravestone cleaners’ profile to see if I could view it, cause normally it blocks it after scrolling some, but now it’s all blocked. Maybe my VPN shit, idk.

Or maybe you are just a liar posting misinformation in every thread you take part it.

Once again, I love easily identifiable patterns.

[Edge-]

https://mashable.com/article/twitter...er-issues-apps

Twitter's new API may now cost tens of thousands of dollars per month, but the service being provided to its customers appears to be worse than ever.

That's the general sentiment among developers who are still part of the once-robust third-party Twitter app ecosystem. According to developers paying Twitter, since the switch over to Elon Musk's paid API subscription plans, Twitter's API has experienced frequent issues that make it extremely difficult to run their apps.

Twitter's API issues have frustrated developers in each of Twitter's new API access tiers. Those with Basic or Pro plans — paying $100 and $5000 a month for API access, respectively — have experienced unannounced changes to their plans, numerous bugs, and often receive zero customer support. And developers shelling out for Twitter's Enterprise API Plan, which starts at $42,000 per month, are experiencing sudden outages and disappointing service considering the money they're paying.

"Everything used to work fine before we started paying half a million per year," shared one developer in a private Twitter developer group chat shared with Mashable.

So basically it seems that Elon has just literally made every aspect of Twitter worse.

Unless you're a right wing propagandist or malicious bigot, then this is the best Twitter has literally ever been.

rofl the simps aren't paying $8/month hard enough to access a free service, receive more targeted advertisements, and still have everyone scroll over all their replies because everyone knows that blue checkmark posts are basically idiots now

[Cthulhu 2020]

The only reason Twitter hasn't imploded yet is that there's a lot of people who have established themselves there, Elon has forbidden outside social media links, and there's not really any social media more ubiquitous than Twitter.

There is an effective monopoly on the short form blurb from Twitter for everyday casual usage, and an effective monopoly on short form video from Tiktok. Facebook is primarily family social media and LinkedIn is professional/work related social media.

As soon as a short blurb social media site with a better API and mass appeal comes along, Twitter is finished. But I don't see that happening for awhile.

[Jester Joe]

The only reason Twitter hasn't imploded yet is that there's a lot of people who have established themselves there, Elon has forbidden outside social media links, and there's not really any social media more ubiquitous than Twitter.

There is an effective monopoly on the short form blurb from Twitter for everyday casual usage, and an effective monopoly on short form video from Tiktok. Facebook is primarily family social media and LinkedIn is professional/work related social media.

As soon as a short blurb social media site with a better API and mass appeal comes along, Twitter is finished. But I don't see that happening for awhile.

I mean, if these log in changes aren't reverted, I imagine the ball can start rolling soon.

Just look at companies like Blizzard that uses Twitter as a way to directly inform players of issues quickly. This change guts that pretty hard if you're forced to also log in to see anything since that drastically cuts down the amount of players who can see it.

Maybe I'm just being optimistic but this change is gonna hurt companies enough to hopefully encourage them to look elsewhere.

[Edge-]

Maybe I'm just being optimistic but this change is gonna hurt companies enough to hopefully encourage them to look elsewhere.

Given that Twitter has largely not reversed course on the policies that have driven away I believe more than half of their advertising revenue, I'm pretty skeptical.

[Belize]

I mean, Facebook and Instagram already have similar content restrictions for non-users.

This isn’t new.

You can browse facebook without an account, unless the account you're browsing is set to friends only/private

[Calfredd]

That's a form of content restriction to lure you into creating an account to view the rest of the content. Not like Twitter's current one, but still similar restrictions to get people using the platform.

Key words here. You said no content earlier while everyone was already saying you can view with restrictions.

[Edge-]

It's telling me something about group content being restricted... whatever the fuck that means, idk.

Ok, so you don't know how to use the social media sites as a free user and consequently don't understand how this change differs from how other sites work. Cool. I don't say this as an insult, I say this because this is what you've posted in the above.

To humor this, that's because the poster has limited access to only certain groups like their friends. You can't view that if the poster limits it, but there's still public content.