Post

Remembering that time when some big name accounts were arguing that X is all good now and the algorithm has been de-Elon'd. Wait, that was yesterday. The same time this was happening.

This post is unavailable.

1K reposts3.5K likes

Do they offer any evidence that the algorithm has been de-Elon'd? Or is it just vibes? Is the algorithm open source? The idea that a narcissistic trillionaire racist weirdo has relinquished control of the algorithm he owns, one capable of broadly shaping public opinion, seems far-fetched to me.

In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the obvious answer is that the algorithm has been carefully tuned for subtlety, not whacking people over the head with insane takes and driving them away, but instead easing them in to a right wing world view before immersing them fully in the cesspool.

(yeah, it's simplified because ELI5) That finding by the commission was a problem, because the Republicans, who were appointed to that commission in order to be bipartisan, did not like that story. They had their own preferred stories and so they stuck to them.

Their priority to preserve the veracity of their story and their ideologies was more important than the priority to be led by evidence. That is why you have dissenting views by Holtz-Eakins and Wallison. The commission failed because it could not get agreement.

A middle-aged white cis man thinks X is “remarkably inclusive and friendly”; at least three factors might lead him to conclude that, the fact that he’s apparently OK with hanging out at the Nazi bar with a CSAM generator notwithstanding.

Same play they tried to run on Jack Smith with the whole Atlanta Hawks thing (which Schmitt knew was bullshit). Get the disinformation out there, hoping people won't notice if a day or two later it's debunked.

I read Gruber's post, went to Xitter, read the first trending topic, "James Talarico". A cesspool. Full of lies, slurs (did you know Talarico is gay, trans, and dying of AIDs and/or drugs?). It's a disinformation engine. If one doesn't see it every day, it's because Musk doesn't need it every day.

Anyone who thought Musk bought Twitter because he thought he could make $ by making its business profitable was hand-your-wallet-to-the -wallet-inspector gullible.

You're wrong there. Twitter is profitable, but not from the social media side. It's profitable because he's selling access to all of twitter to data centers to use to train their AI.

Musk didn’t fire the trust & safety teams because he was trying to g to achieve profitability. He fired them because he wants the opposite of safety. Because the followers he wants will trust the nonsense he shovels to them.

Absolutely. Section 230 helps protect a site’s ability to moderate user posts. The fact that the management of X is making horrible editorial decisions should not remove that protection.

I don't know how to tell if this is true or not (the community note suppression). In some sense, that's the core problem with closed systems but also, in this specific instance, I really can't figure out how to tell!

It would be easy enough to just time-stamp community notes, or have a wikipedia style edit history. The other examples of Musk boosting the story and suspending the account debunking it are pretty evident. "a lie can get a million views before the community note gets attached"

You can view pending notes, but it isn't super easy to find that part of the website unless your account is approved to vote on/submit them. (attach a phone number, maybe some other things) Can't remember if there's a fixed threshold for when one goes live.