• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    122 days ago

    I mean in principle this is just a matter of moderation being different from censorship.

    But really, an “algorithm tweak”? I am still wondering when or why who decided that we needed to have “algorithms” that someone could “tweak” on the Internet at all. The first kind of “social media” I ever used was web forums where the entire “algorithm” was thread bumping, and even if you insist that we need to have the structure of a microblog: Mastodon does fine without an “algorithm” beyond reverse-chronological sorting.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 days ago

      I think Mastodon does fine, too, but I’ve often heard people complain about the lack of an algorithm. Like, they don’t know how to find things if they aren’t being shoveled into their feed

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 days ago

        Personally I follow slightly more than 100 accounts plus less than 10 hashtags and feel I’m already getting plenty of things into my feed, nowadays I tend to unfollow things that post too many irrelevant things more than I follow new ones.

    • tb_
      link
      fedilink
      English
      42 days ago

      But you had all these rightwing weirdos complaining they were being censored because “the algorithm” didn’t promote their weird little ideas enough!

      Back when.
      So tweaking the algorithm is quite literally censorship!

      Not that this “free-speech absolutist” has proven particularly true to his word.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 days ago

        I strongly agree with the point made in the linked article that censorship is when a sender wants to send something, the receiver wants to receive it, but a third party (government, social media platform, whoever) keeps them from doing so.

        If I want to see “weird little ideas of rightwing weirdos” (or of leftwing weirdos or any others), I should be allowed to. If I don’t, I shouldn’t have to.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1263 days ago

    No no, guys, you’re misunderstanding. He MEANS there’s too much negativity from people saying things like “X sucks since musk bought twitter…”

    He’s going to change those people’s tweets to say “X is great!”

    And by that I mean he’s going to have a team to edit tweets that he doesn’t like!

    If that’s not free speech, then Musk doesn’t know what is!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      9
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      This has nothing to do with Twitters image. He could have enforced that decision sooner if it was. This is about Trump. The negativity was helpful during Bidens presidency. Now that Trump is about to take over everything has to look like the world is happy again. It’s political manipulation.

      • Chozo
        link
        fedilink
        193 days ago

        It’d be great if they all got together for Jonestown 2.0.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          73 days ago

          If someone were to poison the food at mar a lago, that person would have done more for this country than anybody else in the past 50 years.

        • @droporain
          link
          English
          93 days ago

          Gotta catch that starship to Mars!

    • burghler
      link
      fedilink
      English
      53 days ago

      Wish I could know what this said before it was censored

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Check out the mod log.

        Just looked: regardless of your personal opinion the comment is a breach of the terms of posting. It essentially said Musk should permanently retire himself from life.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 days ago

        It said basically the equivalent of musk should piss on the 3rd rail. Mods arbitrarily removed my comment, probably because it included the phrase ‘kill himself’, while allowing these various replies that aren’t qualitatively different. Mods do need to feel important.

        • burghler
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 days ago

          Esteemed fellows as regarded as they are do have to show a presence I guess. There are no good billionaires afterall

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    46
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    X/Twitter is a misinformation platform. If you know a major influencer that uses, consider informing and directing them to the ActivityPub alternatives, even advertising on their platforms if you can.

    • Drusas
      link
      fedilink
      22 days ago

      I like how you say “that uses” instead of “that uses it” because the former generally implies drug use.

    • exu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      122 days ago

      Sadly we lost that fight to the other centralised platform in Bluesky

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          62 days ago

          Blue sky (and just about anything else) is an improvement, but remember, there is no bottom, things can always be worse. Truth Social and Gab both still exist.

          These websites, because they are all centralized, are all ultimately moderated in accordance with the whims of their owners, the effect of which was thrown into sharp relief after Apartheid Willy Wonka bought Twitter.

          With a federated platform like Mastodon, no single owner would be able to do this. If an instance suddenly became terrible, they could be de-federated and they’d lose their reach.

          Of course, if one instance became particularly large, the ‘whims of the owner’ problem would come right back, but at least the alternatives would still be readily available.