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?
Control is the game for people with money and power whether it is graceful or not. Some of what Elon has done seems like he wants to control the narrative around his jet. Some of what Elon is doing seems like he just wants to keep testing the waters to see how many people still use twitter after crippling the system. Like some sort of “I slap them in the face and they ask to be hit harder- that’s how much power I have over them. People are obsessed with me”.
I don’t think his goal was to kill twitter. His goal was to remain on everyone’s lips without his jet being mentioned. And if that’s at the cost of organizational tools being destroyed, so be it- in fact, destroying twitter has had more people taking about him than ever.
Yeah, I think that’s more or less right. Musk has gone off the rails, and is using his fortune as a cudgel in a fit of pique.
It’s our own fault that our “town square” was so easily taken over by a rich bully, though. I was warning people back in 2007 that depending so heavily on Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, was a bad idea. People did not want to hear it. It’s hard to picture now, but people used to love those companies, and couldn’t imagine them doing harm. But like…it was inevitable.
We need to build on things like Lemmy, Mastodon, Diaspora, whatever. If you hand control of the town square to a corporation, they’re gonna control access and charge fees, and they’ll happily sell it to someone who wants to turn it into a mud-wrestling pit. That’s not the fault of the corporations–it’s our fault.
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?
Control is the game for people with money and power whether it is graceful or not. Some of what Elon has done seems like he wants to control the narrative around his jet. Some of what Elon is doing seems like he just wants to keep testing the waters to see how many people still use twitter after crippling the system. Like some sort of “I slap them in the face and they ask to be hit harder- that’s how much power I have over them. People are obsessed with me”.
I don’t think his goal was to kill twitter. His goal was to remain on everyone’s lips without his jet being mentioned. And if that’s at the cost of organizational tools being destroyed, so be it- in fact, destroying twitter has had more people taking about him than ever.
Yeah, I think that’s more or less right. Musk has gone off the rails, and is using his fortune as a cudgel in a fit of pique.
It’s our own fault that our “town square” was so easily taken over by a rich bully, though. I was warning people back in 2007 that depending so heavily on Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc, was a bad idea. People did not want to hear it. It’s hard to picture now, but people used to love those companies, and couldn’t imagine them doing harm. But like…it was inevitable.
We need to build on things like Lemmy, Mastodon, Diaspora, whatever. If you hand control of the town square to a corporation, they’re gonna control access and charge fees, and they’ll happily sell it to someone who wants to turn it into a mud-wrestling pit. That’s not the fault of the corporations–it’s our fault.
deleted by creator
Not to mention that the 1% already owned it.
Though if anyone is thinking of spending close to fifty billion to destoy a social network then call me - I’ll do it for a billion, or two.
i implied no intent, you just filled in the obvious gaps and are upset about it.
I mean, you absolutely did imply intent. You may not have meant to, but you did.
deleted by creator