6 ms·

Elon's acquisition of Twitter is a gift that just keeps on giving. At this point, considering the social polarization it brought, destroying Twitter for good wo

Elon's acquisition of Twitter is a gift that just keeps on giving. At this point, considering the social polarization it brought, destroying Twitter for good would be an immense service to humanity, and Musk is doing exactly that, even if unwillingly.

wnc3141 3y ago
Its interesting given that it would probably be easier to just hire a few competent managers to steer Twitter into profitability rather than Musk actively managing Twitter into the ground.
- danudey 3y ago
  Musk is operating Twitter in a "divine right of kings" sort of way. He's been chosen by (who? God? investors? being rich?) to run things, and therefore whatever it is he does is obviously the correct choice and it's heresy to suggest otherwise (and will get you fired). He thinks that every idea he has is a good idea, simply because he had it, and therefore his ability to think on his feet and come up with and try new ideas is a virtue; he doesn't understand having to build and maintain something, to provide stability and consistency, because that would mean not using all of his new great ideas. Unfortunately, all of his ideas sound like he came up with them while sitting around in his mom's basement getting high and saying "wouldn't it be cool if...", so I guess we'll see how this all bears out. My biggest hope is that people see him for who he really is: an insecure and entitled man-child who's never been told no.
  - monetus 3y ago
    This rebranding is so bad, it sounds like you are denigrating the average stoner idea with that comparison imo.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  That would be better for twitter and Elon Musk. But it's better for the rest of us if he crashes and burns the company.
giraffe_lady 3y ago
Did twitter bring the polarization or simply act as a venue for it? Either way, despite how polarized it may have been, it was valuable for many groups and a large number of genuinely grassroots social & artistic movements originated there or effectively used it. Destroying those doesn't seem like a clear cut positive for humanity, as you're framing it.
- eatsyourtacos 3y ago
  I would argue it did in a way- mostly because of the character limit and lack of a comment tree. You can't have an actual discussion with such a small character limit. However it's easy to spout off nonsense bullshit in a small character limit. And then no one can really argue with you because it takes more words to actually back things up. Thus it's really easy to spread bullshit and the people who are more susceptible just eat it up as they can only stay focused for a few sentences anyway. TikTok was kind of the same way and it drove me crazy up until the last year, because the comment limit was so short (and the fact that you can't really see a thread properly, just like twitter.) The user base of tiktok seems to have vastly changed over the last year (or maybe they keep improving their algo so much I just don't encounter it) but I've gotten used to the limit because people aren't arguing as much they are just genuinely commenting on a video. I was always a fan of Reddit (until recently) because it was just a message board- you could actually read real thoughts and have a formatted threaded discussion (like on HN).
  - KingMob 3y ago
    As someone who argues routinely with long-winded racists on Reddit, it's no haven. Nor are the crackpots spewing 1/6 rants and COVID conspiracies on Facebook. I think social media itself is the problem, not the post length.
    - lostlogin 3y ago
      100%. Letting everyone talk is free speech. On the street you walk away from the lunatic, but with social media they find their kind and yell together.
misiti3780 3y ago
I have had this opinion since day one: either he makes it better or burns it to the ground, either way, it's a win.

wnc3141 3y ago

Its interesting given that it would probably be easier to just hire a few competent managers to steer Twitter into profitability rather than Musk actively managing Twitter into the ground.

danudey 3y ago
Musk is operating Twitter in a "divine right of kings" sort of way. He's been chosen by (who? God? investors? being rich?) to run things, and therefore whatever it is he does is obviously the correct choice and it's heresy to suggest otherwise (and will get you fired). He thinks that every idea he has is a good idea, simply because he had it, and therefore his ability to think on his feet and come up with and try new ideas is a virtue; he doesn't understand having to build and maintain something, to provide stability and consistency, because that would mean not using all of his new great ideas. Unfortunately, all of his ideas sound like he came up with them while sitting around in his mom's basement getting high and saying "wouldn't it be cool if...", so I guess we'll see how this all bears out. My biggest hope is that people see him for who he really is: an insecure and entitled man-child who's never been told no.
- monetus 3y ago
  This rebranding is so bad, it sounds like you are denigrating the average stoner idea with that comparison imo.
mcpackieh 3y ago
That would be better for twitter and Elon Musk. But it's better for the rest of us if he crashes and burns the company.

giraffe_lady 3y ago

Did twitter bring the polarization or simply act as a venue for it? Either way, despite how polarized it may have been, it was valuable for many groups and a large number of genuinely grassroots social & artistic movements originated there or effectively used it. Destroying those doesn't seem like a clear cut positive for humanity, as you're framing it.

eatsyourtacos 3y ago
I would argue it did in a way- mostly because of the character limit and lack of a comment tree. You can't have an actual discussion with such a small character limit. However it's easy to spout off nonsense bullshit in a small character limit. And then no one can really argue with you because it takes more words to actually back things up. Thus it's really easy to spread bullshit and the people who are more susceptible just eat it up as they can only stay focused for a few sentences anyway. TikTok was kind of the same way and it drove me crazy up until the last year, because the comment limit was so short (and the fact that you can't really see a thread properly, just like twitter.) The user base of tiktok seems to have vastly changed over the last year (or maybe they keep improving their algo so much I just don't encounter it) but I've gotten used to the limit because people aren't arguing as much they are just genuinely commenting on a video. I was always a fan of Reddit (until recently) because it was just a message board- you could actually read real thoughts and have a formatted threaded discussion (like on HN).
- KingMob 3y ago
  As someone who argues routinely with long-winded racists on Reddit, it's no haven. Nor are the crackpots spewing 1/6 rants and COVID conspiracies on Facebook. I think social media itself is the problem, not the post length.
  - lostlogin 3y ago
    100%. Letting everyone talk is free speech. On the street you walk away from the lunatic, but with social media they find their kind and yell together.

misiti3780 3y ago

I have had this opinion since day one: either he makes it better or burns it to the ground, either way, it's a win.