9 ms·
Welcome to Hell, Elon
- TradingPlaces 4y agoNilay Patel is a national treasure. Every word is true, but especially this: >The essential truth of every social network is that the product is content moderation, and everyone hates the people who decide how content moderation works.
- pipeline_peak 4y ago
- happytoexplain 4y agoYes, but we should probably avoid framing those two sides so hatefully and over-broadly, as you and the author have done. Edit: After my post, the parent was edited to include the qualifier, "both of these opinions are the extreme".
- pipeline_peak 4y agoI don't think what I'm saying is broad, there are many SJW minded people who fall into harassing/blacklisting/doxxing
- happytoexplain 4y agoI think it's as broad and uncharitable as saying Republicans are racist. It's not that there aren't a lot of people who fall into the category, it's that, by itself, the phrase adds nothing and acts only as an insult to the entire group. You can certainly say that same thing as part of a larger, refined context that trims away the implied spit-at-the-feet of the broader group.
- pipeline_peak 4y agoI said SJW bullies, that is people of the SJW type who bully, not SJW's are bullies
- Covzire 4y agoRight, I think Elon's idea is moving censorship into everyone's own responsibility, something like: Follow who you want to, ignore who you don't, it's not your responsibility nor your right to silence other people off a monopoly platform just because you disagree with them.
- nemo44x 4y agoExactly and he more or less spells this out in his letter. He compares his vision for Twitter to that of how how video games and movies work today. People choose what they want to hear and see and everything else is ignored. Pornography exists with Disney movies which exists with violent movies, etc, and we pick and choose what we want to see. I think it would be great if users could join communities that the members of moderate and regulate and can set rules such as only people that are members of a particular group or "friend groups" can engage with the group. This is more closely how the real world works. And yes there will be scumbags but they'll just not be able to engage with groups of people that aren't interested in them.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoSo Twitter will stop recommending things? No more trending topics? Because right now it actively tries to spread engagement through topical controversy.
- ilyt 4y agoNope, just option to opt out. "Don't recommend me stuff from category politics"
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoIs that not already an option?
- mikkergp 4y agoThis would be great, but it's also how they get "engagement" and "eyeballs" and all those fanschy schamnsy things advertisers love.
- commandlinefan 4y agoYeah, had the same thought. People seem to be perfectly happy to participate in horribly moderated internet spaces full of people who are exactly like not-all-men fedora bullies, but in the other direction - mostly because there's no alternative (yet).
- happytoexplain 4y ago>there's no alternative There are and have been many alternatives, but the balance between moderation and userbase is delicate. Assuming a minimum of "only moderate illegal content": Too much moderation and you might get a large userbase, but you get boring content or loud complaints from those moderated, and it discourages real conversation. Too little moderation and you get fun but chaotic/edgy content that drives away an even bigger chunk of people, and also discourages real conversation. It seems to me that people who want Twitter to moderate less are either looking for the best of both worlds, which might be impossible, or really just want Twitter to be like 4chan, not because they really think it's "what's best", but because they want to attack their enemies in the social/political war, and that would be a big symbolic win.
- mikkergp 4y ago“ Twitter, the company, makes very little interesting technology; the tech stack is not the valuable asset. The asset is the user base: hopelessly addicted politicians, reporters, celebrities, and other people who should know better but keep posting anyway. You! You, Elon Musk, are addicted to Twitter. You’re the asset. You just bought yourself for $44 billion dollars.”
- labrador 4y agoMy first thought when Musk bought Twitter was "His engineering has team figured out content moderation" but I've seen no evidence or talk of that. So I think it's true that he impulsively bought himself his worst nightmare.
- datalopers 4y agoHe's going find it's tough growing a company without a constant flow of government contracts and subsidies.
- 93po 4y agoYou mean like he did with Zip2 at over $300 million, and X.com at over $1.5 billion? As far as I know Starlink isn't getting subsidies either. Tell us about your experience at growing companies - do you know something about this that Elon doesn't?
- datalopers 4y agoHi Jason.
- 93po 4y ago?
- dsfyu404ed 4y agoI'm pretty sure every MBA ever is laughing at the implicit assumptions in the article and these comments. It might not be pretty but there are other ways than growth to make a company more profitable/valuable...
- pmoriarty 4y agoI'm not sure if Musk's goal is to make Twitter profitable or to make some sort of ideological point.
- 4y ago
- erellsworth 4y agoYou done messed up E-Elon.
- erellsworth 4y agoMan, I guess folks here don't like Key & Peele jokes.
- aaronbrethorst 4y agoI’m quite fond of that sketch.
- zote 4y agoIt is a wonderful sketch A-aron
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jayd16 4y agoFunny references alone will get down voted. It's just the culture of this board. If you want to joke you'll need some more substance as well.
- Freak_NL 4y agoIf I wanted comments where I could correctly guess what the first ten most popular posts would be if I had an encyclopaedic knowledge of memes, I'd go to Reddit. I don't think that this is a uncommon view to hold here. Just different cultures, as you say.
- Koshkin 4y agoThen it won't be a joke anymore...
- spacemadness 4y ago
- LatteLazy 4y agoIt's very very unclear to me why he bought it. He said it was about free speech but Twitter is already about as free as it's possible to be without permitting a whole bunch of content that is NOT protected under the first amendment (CP, calls to violence etc). And if it is about free speech then it cannot be an automated moderation play, because there is nothing to moderate if you're a pure free speech platform. The best I can guess, is it's a political play? Turn down politicians who he dislikes? Or he just had a drunk/high/bipolar period and did it without a plan.
- paulpauper 4y agoIt was a joke. He didn't want to buy it.
- yreg 4y ago>Twitter is already about as free as it's possible E.g. in Trump's case they could have deleted the few tweets which they considered calls to violence instead of handing out a permanent ban. (I'm not saying they should have done that.)
- Chris2048 4y agoYou are suggesting the only people banned from twitter are those posting "CP, calls to violence etc" - not true. Also, other than bans there are suspensions such as the New York Post for a story on Hunter Biden. Plus there are plenty posting call to violence who are not banned, but are suspiciously on the "right" side of politics.
- bpodgursky 4y ago> Twitter is already about as free as it's possible to be without permitting a whole bunch of content that is NOT protected under the first amendment This is just wildly untrue. There is a huge range of gender-critical views, vaccine skepticism, any combination of race/gender/genetics/IQ discourse, and a ton of other topics that will get you banned, that come nowhere near first amendment protections. You might think that's a good thing, that's a valid argument, but it's simply untrue to imply that the limit is similar to 1A protections.
- 4y ago
- nelsonic 4y agoNever bet against Elon. Starlink alone will make more money than twitter ever could. If you don’t see the potential for Twitter. That’s fine. But don’t write an article about how it’s “hell” if you don’t have the vision for how to improve it. That’s like someone who has no idea how to cook leaving a bad review for food they could never hope to improve on. If Elon listened to Haters/Doubters like this Verge journo, the world would be worse off.
- runjake 4y agoNilay's job is to generate revenue for The Verge and it's shareholders. You generate revenue by increasing ad views. You can increase ad revenue with controversial hot takes with saucy language. Nilay is doing the exact right thing, in the context of his corporate job.
- paulpauper 4y agoyeah, many hedge funds and individuals have lost serious $ betting against tesla
- cma 4y agoDon't bet against him getting away with scamming. And don't bet against politicians wanting to affiliate with his celebrity/interact with his clout giving him subsidies.
- dymk 4y agoYeah, all those Teslas which deffo weren’t sold, what a scam
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoAre you saying the Tesla valuation is only due to the cars that have been sold?
- dymk 4y ago
- karaterobot 4y agoI am personally hoping that Twitter will break Elon Musk, and then go out of business. That would be the best possible outcome. I am not holding my breath that it will happen, but it would be incredible.
- influx 4y agoWhy would losing Tesla and SpaceX be incredible?
- inkcapmushroom 4y agoThose companies would not evaporate without Elon.
- influx 4y agoWould they be where they are without him?
- neonsunset 4y agoTo people downvoting this message - I do sincerely hope we get to live in two separate lifetimes: me in the one where SpaceX succeeds and you in the one where it fails.
- beardyw 4y agoI think the post was referring to Musk, not those companies.
- IgorPartola 4y agoTesla existed before Musk. He bought it and by arbitration got listed as a founder.
- 93po 4y agoThis is such a tired take. Tesla was worth, at most, a few million dollars when Elon became their largest investor. They had no products. They had no sales. He turned a $2 million company into a $700 billion company, but he's not the founder because he wasn't in the paperwork for the first year of its existence in which very little happened? Ok.
- evouga 4y agoFascinating that the OP compares Twitter to “living at Disney World”! I can’t stand the obviously fake facades and carefully curated costumes and fake smiles at Disney in large doses and never understood the mindset that could drive adults to want to live full-time at the park. Twitter addiction has wasted the best minds of my generation and if it implodes and takes Musk with it… win-win!
- hdjjhhvvhga 4y agoWhile I agree with the author on many things, this one upset me: > fucking government... They’re out here banning books, Elon! I don't believe that repeating a lie will make it true. The government is not banning any books, Nilay. Parents do. And not globally, but at a local level. It's another question whether they should or not, but I'd expect more precision and integrity from a prominent journalist. Most people don't fact check everything and if they learn something from a reputable source, they believe it.
- dymk 4y agoWho do you think enforces a book ban at a local school?
- hdjjhhvvhga 4y agoParents aka the people. Literally the opposite of the government.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoThat's why the constitution starts with "We the government".
- dymk 4y ago...By making a kerfuffle to the school, and public schools are ran by a institution we know of as...
- gjsman-1000 4y agoThe Verge is actually a subsidiary of Vox, the far-left tabloid. It's not surprising then that Vox-like traits appear in their articles.
- pionar 4y agoParents through their local school boards, AKA, government.
- joshstrange 4y agoCan't wait to see that hot takes from the free speech absolutists who have never experienced that first-hand on a platform they frequent regularly. We already know what that looks like, it's 4chan/8kun/etc and surprise, it's absolute shit.
- wooque 4y ago>4chan/8kun/etc and surprise, it's absolute shit ...for you, 4chan is one of the last places on the internet that feel like the old internet, organic, unfiltered, raw. If you can't handle it, there is Facebook for you.
- BossHogg 4y agoAs someone on the internet in the early 90s, that is absolutely not the case.
- chimineycricket 4y agoWhat's another website that feels more like the old internet than 4chan?
- endemic 4y agohttps://dataswamp.org/~john/ https://dataswamp.org/~john/
- sixstringtheory 4y agoHas a guestbook, old internet confirmed.
- Volundr 4y ago> If you can't handle it, there is Facebook for you. And Twitter. Similarly if you don't like the filtered environment of these communities there is 4chan/8kun/etc. So then this is a solved problem and all the hand-wringing around the moderation on these platforms is unnecessary?
- nemo44x 4y agoI'm betting that something like the Google Circles gets implemented but at a higher level. In order to engage with certain people you have to be a member of certain groups/circles or not a member of certain circles/groups. These groups would be moderated by the people that run them. So instead of having Twitter pick and choose who is allowed on the platform, you crowdsource it to the people who want to moderate their groups - and lots of these people exist.
- SilverBirch 4y agoIsn't that... reddit?
- nemo44x 4y agoI don’t think so. Reddit is about topical groups. Circles are more like trusted connections between people. Like how society works. I should be able to see the content “everyone” makes or be able to limit myself to exclude certain groups or only include certain groups of people. This way if there is content that you consider harmful to yourself or you are unable to live with it, you can still participate on the platform. It’s an individuals choice, not a corporations.
- uni_rule 4y agoSounds like what Discord is slowly becoming as it adds forum pages with comment threads as an option on public servers.
- notacoward 4y ago> I'm betting that something like the Google Circles gets implemented This would actually be a great outcome IMO. Supporting shared blocklists would have similar effect, and probably be easier to implement. Unfortunately, I very much doubt than Elmo Nutsack would allow that. Despite all his claims about "free speech" I'm pretty sure enabling those who would silence people they deem too "woke" via harassment is very much part of the reason behind his takeover. Check out the #TwitterTakeover tag to see the hordes slavering at the prospect (but be aware that it's hard on the stomach if you're a decent person).
- popilewiz 4y ago
- SilverBirch 4y agoYeah, I think this absolutely nails it, and what I find interesting is that in all the time this acquisition has been up in the air Musk has failed to ever engage in the detail of how to address these issues. Elon Musk is interestingly probably the worst person to run Twitter, because whilst the previous guys running twitter weren't very competent, they had their product and they were navigating through issues under extreme pressure. Musk on the other hand, has 1,000 pain points to press on that everyone who previously tried to coerce twitter will now be looking at. Whether it be the federal government pressing on SpaceX, Union busting at Tesla, or whether it's Texas coming after Twitter for abortion information, he is going to be so much more exposed.
- 93po 4y ago> Musk has failed to ever engage in the detail of how to address these issues Do you mean engage publicly, or engage even privately within his own teams?
- SilverBirch 4y agoBoth, even within what we learned about through the chancery discovery and the leaks (lots of information leaked about what Musk presented to the bankers and investors as the business plan which is where the 75% cut number came from)
- 93po 4y agoCan you tell me more about his private teams and their interactions with Elon? How often have they been reaching out to Elon, what do those communications look like, and what does it look like when Elon declines to provide them that information?
- harshaw 4y agoHell indeed. A problem space with intractable non technical challenges. The saddest part for me is the distraction from the potential of his other businesses, most specifically SpaceX. I just want to see Starship succeed.
- jongjong 4y agoThis article makes no sense; it sounds like leftist propaganda. Advertisers only care about 'brand safety' to the extent that it impacts their ability to sell stuff. So long as users keep using the platform, advertisers will keep coming back - They're not going to vacate the platform and let their competitors get all the eyeballs... If they did, those competitors would gain market share and make incumbents irrelevant. Users have made it clear that they want free speech on social media platforms so I don't see how giving users what they want would cause them to leave. The problem with Twitter so far is that they sold out to big governments and big corporations and completely neglected their users in the process. Having front-row access to users, Twitter is actually in a position to dictate the rules; it should not be taking orders from politicians and corporate executives when those orders are harmful to its users.
- _hcuq 4y agoAdvertisers love 4chan type sewers. So do users.
- jongjong 4y agoThis makes no sense because people on Twitter choose who they follow. If some 'deplorables' want to follow some other deplorables, then let them; I'm sure some companies will still want to advertise to them. The people who only want to consume government and corporate propaganda will only see content from like-minded people anyway; they will get the safe experience that they want. No problem! Companies can target them and sell them cricket flour, dried maggots, lab-grown meat and COVID booster vaccine number 27... These people won't even realize that the deplorables also use Twitter because they will be in a different filter bubble.
- throwaway71271 4y agohalf the article is about moderation because of advertisement, but he could just not do advertisement.
- lastofthemojito 4y agoThen how does Twitter make money? According to their latest quarterly report they had $1.18B in revenue, $1.08B from advertising. Is there really enough potential in "premium users" or something else to forgo that billion dollars per quarter? https://s22.q4cdn.com/826641620/files/doc_financials/2022/q2/Final_Q2'22_Earnings_Release.pdf https://s22.q4cdn.com/826641620/files/doc_financials/2022/q2...
- qualudeheart 4y agoMusk can afford to sink money into it. It’s an important enough propaganda platform to be worth operating even at a less.
- minimaxir 4y agoThe key quote which other comments are overlooking: > Here are some examples: you can write as many polite letters to advertisers as you want, but you cannot reasonably expect to collect any meaningful advertising revenue if you do not promise those advertisers “brand safety.” That means you have to ban racism, sexism, transphobia, and all kinds of other speech that is totally legal in the United States but reveals people to be total assholes. So you can make all the promises about “free speech” you want, but the dull reality is that you still have to ban a bunch of legal speech if you want to make money. And when you start doing that, your creepy new right-wing fanboys are going to viciously turn on you, just like they turn on every other social network that realizes the same essential truth. The one thing that can be counted on Elon doing is Elon doing what makes him the most money.
- lastofthemojito 4y agoElon has also talked about open sourcing "the algorithm" or letting people customize the algorithm that suggests content for them, etc. I suspect that plays in here - by default, Twitter users (and unauthenticated browsers) will probably continue to see Twitter the same way as today, with relatively safe, moderated content. Logged-in folks will also have the option to go into unmoderated mode, which will drop you into the cesspool if you so desire. Presumably respectable companies will only advertise on the default layer; ads in the cesspool will be for "edgy" t-shirt companies and extremist politicians and others who don't care about their brand being displayed next to questionable content (or prefer it!). Illegal content of course must continue to be moderated regardless.
- ilyt 4y agoWell, giving users of social media tools to filter stuff they want to see themselves rather than making site's moderators be moral guardians of the site (lmao) is certainly a better approach.
- ThrowawayR2 4y agoTo play the devil's advocate: So why haven't advertisers abandoned Fox News? As long as Musk limits his newly acquired toy to being no worse than Fox News (which is plenty bad!), he can still keep advertising dollars coming in.
- screye 4y ago> Twitter is a disaster clown car company that is successful despite itself Isn't this the best kind of company to acquire ? A product that has such inherent value that even a bumbling clown car of company could not sabotage its ability to retain users. Imo, Reddit and Twitter have monopolized 2 of the most effective forms of communication to have existed on the internet: Forums and memes (memes in the Dawkinian sense) and their tiny size is entirely a result of terrible leadership. While musk didn't buy it for a particularly cheap price (at least in Winter 2022 prices), He should be able to justify the net worth as well as any competing tech company will be able to. To quote Charlie Munger: > Never underestimate the man who overestimates himself. These weird guys who overestimate themselves occasionally knock it right out of the park. I would never buy Tesla stock and I would never sell it short.
- incomingpain 4y ago>Isn't this the best kind of company to acquire ? Elon isn't worried about valuation. His consideration could be 'can I fix low hanging fruit and provide value' If elon is right the current content moderation has gone wrong, and it has. Then by fixing this it should provide a return on his investment. Not to mention the counter force of those who cannot allow free discussion who may buy him out in order to stop it. But more important, what elon also understands. What is a billion $? Elon is wealthy enough he can own any toy or thing he ever wants. It has less to do with some currency and himself. He has surpassed this point in economics placing him amongst a select few who have won this game. Now he has the chance to use this excess wealth to form the future. Which scares people.
- throwaway0x7E6 4y agotwitter could be in the green tomorrow if he really did fire all the useless mouths there. I will be very happy if all their frontend people get axed.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- lemondrink 4y agoIs Twitter not dying? The youth don’t care, the elderly don’t care, and those in the middle (late twenties, early forties) are ending their terminally online lives for families, careers, travel, etc. Twitter is being distilled into a political tool - both side, endlessly crying into the void, appealing to their confirmation biases. Hop on over to /pol/ to see what unregulated politic speak turns into. I give it 10 years and it’ll be a ghost town.
- badcppdev 4y agoYour demographic breakdown is priceless. * Youth * Late 20s to early 40s * Elderly
- qualudeheart 4y agoI don’t think it’ll be like /pol/ if you mean that it’ll be a right wing monopoly. There are too many leftists for that to happen. There wasn’t a right wing monopoly 10 years ago when Twitter barely had any moderation and people were more conservative. There won’t be one in the future, unless Elon bizarrely goes fascist and bans all the liberals.
- diimdeep 4y agoEveryone who owns mass media[1] and now will be competing with Elon is playing a game of throwing rotten hate tomatoes in his direction, very entertaining to watch. [1] https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/futureofmedia/index-us-mainstream-media-ownership https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/futureofmedia/index-us-mains...
- twoWhlsGud 4y ago"Content moderation is what Twitter makes" - that's a brilliant summation of the problem. These social networks have turned themselves into publishers (by centering the recommendation algorithms where else could you end up?). That's the thing no one wants to think too hard about because of the very uncomfortable implications...
- entropicgravity 4y agoA lot of worrying here about moderation in the new Twitter. Musk though will just whip up a version of Full Self Driving to automate the moderating and problem solved, I'm pretty sure.
- keeperoftruth 4y ago
- NN88 4y ago#MurderedByWords
- amai 4y ago"Are you excited for the Chinese government to find ways to threaten Tesla’s huge business in that country over content that appears on Twitter? Because it’s going to happen." This will happen and not only with China. Just think about Bezos, the Washington Post and Saudi Arabia. But on the other side I think Tesla and SpaceX shouldn't do business with dictatorships anyway. So maybe in the end this will be a good thing.
- Marazan 4y agoFirst they came for Nazis and I did not speak out for I was not a Nazi. Technically I did say something. I said "Cool, get those Nazi's out of here, good job."
- 18pfsmt 4y agoThis is quite a ridiculous blog post. Hyperbole is way too common these days, and this is the type of submission that drove away many of the smartest HN users. I will always remember when I first learned about bitcoin here in 2010 when the white paper was linked. Now we have shrieking missives warning about mean people writing stuff on the internet.
- valeg 4y agoFull of spite. We'll see. But moderation was kinda solved at Something Awful by demanding to pay 10 bucks at sign up. Mr. Musk may use something like this; he can demand 10 dogecoins in order to unblock someone mischievous. Hell, it could even be proportional to the reach of the account.