this post was submitted on 20 Aug 2023
731 points (91.6% liked)

Technology

59377 readers
3769 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Vlyn@lemmy.zip 263 points 1 year ago (43 children)

Because he's doing everything to make it fail and destroy the platform, isn't it obvious?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 161 points 1 year ago (14 children)

No, you don't throw away $44 billion just for shit and giggles, not even if you are as rich as Musk. Musk is (probably) a narcissist who thought he could make it work in his delusional mind.

He wanted a mouthpiece for the MAGA crowd, and he probably thought the desire in the population for it, would make it succeed, if he made the platform embrace that. He probably envisioned himself as a great liberator, who would be celebrated for bringing free speech back to America.

Musk has been losing it for a long time, and it seems to only get worse.

[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Who could of forseen brands not wanting to advertise over hate speech that would turn off half their customer base? I'd love screenshots of my companies products floating around next to seasticas and racism.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] PeleSpirit@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I truly think this is all his fucking up, nothing else. He was trying to take away features that probably align with the people who gave him money, but had no idea how to make it work and make money and is desperate. Desperation makes you even more stupid.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (41 replies)
[–] fubo@lemmy.world 136 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"Everything was fine with our system until the power grid was shut off by Dickless here." — Ray Stantz, Twitter engineer

[–] WarmSoda@lemm.ee 88 points 1 year ago (14 children)

It's true. This man has no dick.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] z00s@lemmy.world 124 points 1 year ago (15 children)

Sure it's his money but does anyone else feel legitimately frustrated at all the good that this money could have done?

Rich dudes have always had vanity projects, but there is no grand concert hall or library or university to come out of this. Just a ruined company with millions of wasted hours of effort. For nothing.

[–] LegionEris@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The horrific opportunity cost inherent to having a billionaire class.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 105 points 1 year ago (2 children)

For the record, It wasn't failing until Musk came in.

[–] MammyWhammy@lemmy.ml 47 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It also wasn't really successful before he came in either. It rarely was profitable and usually operated at a loss.

I mean Musk has seemingly made every bad move imaginable, I can only imagine the ideas he's been talked out of.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 49 points 1 year ago

It was losing money, but not much. They could have made some minor changes to make it profitable. However ~8000 people were making good salaries working for them, and tens of thousands of people and businesses benefited from the platform. Now it's much smaller, less useful, and still not profitable.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] popemichael@lemmy.sdf.org 89 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Once it fails then someone will buy it cheap and rename it twitter.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] orbitz@lemmy.ca 70 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

So with wildfires in Canada there's evacuation zones near me, but I can't click on some announcement links from the main site that shows the evacuation zones because they go to twitter and you need to log in now. I think they show some on other pages on the site but they do the quicklink to the twitter announcement in the sidebar so you have to click around a bit to get to it. Yes I know the name but whatever. My point being is when the social media site that was meant for short bits of info isn't good for emergency notifications where everyone can read, it's shitty and potentially harmful.

[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Governments should either be operating their own systems for this or, hell I don't know, why not just spin up a their ready-to-go Mastodon instance or something else in the fediverse not subject to the delirious whims of a petulant muskrat born with daddy's money?

load more comments (1 replies)

I’m sorry - as someone who has done some work with disaster response, this was one of my main concerns. When they threatened to take away NWS access to API without huge fees, I was honestly horrified. Thankfully they reversed that decision, but a lot of what my organization did was scour Twitter for official information and also personal accounts of folks who needed help/the conditions on the ground.

It is honestly a travesty that a resource such as this can be reduced to literal 💩 when people need it the most. I wish I had an answer, but I don’t. I hope more and more folks/orgs migrate to a suitable alternative(s) sooner rather than later, but the damage has been done. There’s always a percentage who never do, and you can’t fix that.

[–] Ubermeisters@lemmy.zip 66 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Oopsie we repeatedly keep taking away you most valuable organizational tools

  • The 1%
[–] yiliu@informis.land 37 points 1 year ago (7 children)

This take is exhausting. It's like the political version of narcissism: here's how everything that happens in the world is actually a conspiracy against me!

If Musk was a plant to sabotage Twitter on the behalf of the 1%, why would he have done it slowly with a series of increasingly bad decisions that caused a mass migration to distributed open-source platforms? Why not just flip the switch and kill it in one go? Or: why not start a program of bots to talk about how awesome Teslas are, and make Trump seem cool, while shadow-censoring criticism of Musk's friend's companies or governments?

You think They are competent and dastardly enough to plan a takeover of Twitter, but then too bumbling to make better use of it than slowly discrediting it with a series of half-baked ideas from a deranged and detestable front man?

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Intralexical@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Twitter helped create ISIL, and also POTUS45. When actual autocracies see people even trying to organize on Twitter, they simply ban the whole site anyway. And it also played a major role in the Arab Spring, which while originally talking about high ideals like democracy, liberalisation, and human rights, is these days mostly notable for having ruined several countries for a generation.

In fact, that seems to be the trend: Twitter is very good at making its users feel like they're organizing and making changes in the world, when in reality all that is being accomplished is/was inflating their own stock price and throwing outrage around with neither factual context nor a long-term plan to turn it into meaningful positive change. People were able to effect social change before Twitter, but they didn't do it because they saw somebody's sarky hot take for five seconds right before getting their dopamine hit with the "Like" button and then scrolling past it; they did it because they got sick of the way things were. The public-facing data should be kept around for historians and the rest of the curious, but Twitter was always primarily a predatory ad marketplace that gained relevance by being useful for propaganda, and we'll all be better off with it gone.

EDIT: Musk, surely, did buy Twitter for the power and attention he thought it would give him. But he's done it as a petulant, self-destructive manchild, not as some scheme to stifle public discussion— Twitter was already stifling public discussion, just because of what it is.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 66 points 1 year ago (2 children)

X may fail. Twitter didn't fail. Twitter was bought by a twat who decided to shut it down piece by piece.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] KLISHDFSDF@lemmy.ml 62 points 1 year ago (6 children)

X? Can we collectively decide to forever call it "X, formerly known as Twitter" just to piss him off?

[–] RozhkiNozhki@lemmy.world 70 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I like the most recent The Verge variant: Twitter, X, or whatever it’s currently called...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I call it Xitter. The X is pronounced with an "sh" sound.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] loobkoob@kbin.social 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I saw someone on Mastodon say something along the lines of "I'll continue to deadname Twitter for as long as Musk continues to deadname his daughter" and I love that sentiment.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mriguy@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Better to just call it “The site formerly known as Twitter” and don't mention X at all. That would piss him off more.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] turbonewbe@lemm.ee 56 points 1 year ago (29 children)

Took over Twitter. Ruined it. Then : "The sad truth is that there are no great 'social networks' right now,".

[–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Twitter used to be in much better shape financially before musk took over but implying that it was ever "great" is a bit of a stretch

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (28 replies)
[–] RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca 53 points 1 year ago (3 children)

In the same way that car fails when you deliberately drive it 100mph into a brick wall.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MaxPower@feddit.de 49 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

"Here's 44 billion USD, I might fail though ¯\_(ツ)_/¯"

Genius.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] solidsnake2085@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

Good, shut it down. Time to end Twitter.

[–] fne8w2ah@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

Best part was he tried to chicken out of his own deal but the feds obv wouldn't allow him back off on his very own proposal to buy Twitter in the first place!

[–] ThisIsMyLemmyLogin@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Now all he needs to do is to connect his own management of Twitter to its failure.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] deft@ttrpg.network 34 points 1 year ago (6 children)

genuinely convinced he may have intentionally destroyed twitter to make the next presidential campaign operate on a different field.

sounds crazy but without twitter or reddit, how do "the youth" communicate? tiktok? insta?

[–] LostMyRedditLogin@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

There's no reason to speculate his motives. It's obvious he didn't want to buy Twitter when he was forced by courts to buy it. He was being an idiot trying to manipulate the stock price. I know it's hard to believe a multi-billionaire can be an idiot, but it happened. There's no 4d chess move. Rich people are fallible as everyone else.

[–] Sodis@feddit.de 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Big parts of the youth did not use twitter. Twitter had at its peak about 500mio active users. Instagram has 2.4 billion, tiktok 1 billion, snapchat 750mio. The relevancy of twitter is highly skewed, because the media used it a lot.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

thanks for nothing you clown

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I mean, Elon sucks, but I am kind of happy to hear Twitter might fully die. I've always hated the idea of forced character limits.

The world needs more critical and expansive discussion, not additional reasons to summerize and minimize important topics into long headlines.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 32 points 1 year ago (7 children)

I have a feeling that that was the plan from the beginning.

The elite don't like seeing common people have an open forum where they can all talk about how terrible their lives are, that their terrible lives are caused by the elite and that the common people should figure out what to do about it all.

[–] Mowcherie@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's perhaps stupider than that. The guy couldn't take getting made fun of on Twitter, so he bought and killed it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] 30mag@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nothing of value was lost.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nutsack@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

the guy didn't even want twitter. the whole thing is depressing.

[–] drapermache@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

And somehow it’ll be the “woke mind virus’s” fault. There will be no self reflection at all.

load more comments
view more: next ›