Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Elon Musk Is Officially Purchasing Twitter for $44 Billion

Speaking of making money... how much money does Twitter make in general?

$44 billion is A LOT of money. Will Musk ever see a return on his investment?

Or is Twitter just a billionaire's playtoy?

I mean... without shareholders... Twitter never has to return a profit, right? That has its advantages.

:p
 
Michael Scrip said:
Speaking of making money... how much money does Twitter make in general?

$44 billion is A LOT of money. Will Musk ever see a return on his investment?

Or is Twitter just a billionaire's playtoy?

I mean... without shareholders... Twitter never has to return a profit, right? That has its advantages.

:p
Click to expand...
You seem to be more obsessed with Musk than even the musk lovers
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boyyai
turbineseaplane said:
cnets.indiana.edu

Probing political bias on Twitter with drifter bots

Our latest paper "Neutral bots probe political bias on social media" by Wen Chen, Diogo Pacheco, Kai-Cheng Yang & Fil Menczer just came out in Nature Communications. We find strong evidence of political bias on Twitter, but not as many think: (1) it is conservative rather than liberal bias, and
cnets.indiana.edu cnets.indiana.edu
Click to expand...
Interesting study. I wonder if conservative accounts find themselves in more echo chambers because the algorithm suppresses their reach.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bumblebritches5
transpo1 said:
I've seen enough examples to convince me. In fact, you can see the wheels turning at Twitter today, on the news that hundreds of thousands of followers are being subtracted from left-wing politicians and added back to right-wing politicians. It's a blatant admission of bolstering accounts they deemed agreeable and suppressing the ones they don't.

Yes, I can see we disagree on that and I have a feeling it stems from our political differences. If it had been the Russian collusion hoax that had been suppressed the day of the election by Twitter, you might feel differently.

What was the simple question in that case?


Please explain, because I don't see it as anything of the kind. It's rather open-ended.

Not at all, I was simply showing how the law is reasonable and makes allowances for cases where the child may be at harm from parents.

The complaints are broad, and the marketing of the complaints by critics is disingenuous, because they've painted it as censorship, when kids and parents can still speak freely about what ever they want. It's simply an educational directive that has been signed into legislation.

What is your exact position here? Suggest you speak clearly and state it. I hope you've read the article I posted because it analyzes the text of the bill.

I support the bill because I believe in parental choice in the education of their children from K-3. Parents have the right to know what is going on with their children. If someone believes harm may come to the child at home, that's a different story.
Click to expand...
If you can't follow the conversation, then there's no point in continuing it. Thanks.

transpo1 said:
It does not “prohibit discussion” among parents or children. That is disingenuous. From the same article—

“Sen. Manny Diaz, R-Hialeah, told the Senate during legislative debate on March 8 that a counselor would not be required to contact a parent if a student comes to them to say “they are confused and they feel like they may be gay.”

In other words, a student can go to a counselor at any time and discuss it.
Click to expand...
I never said that it did.

Amacfa said:
That is already happening, these publishers position themselves as news outlets which makes it deceptive, thus people take it as face value.
Click to expand...
There are good, objective journalists all over the place. The Republican party's play, lead by the former president, to discredit the whole industry notwithstanding.

The main problem in journalism is the same problem that you are arguing for on Twitter. Actual journalism has to compete with the ******** and misinformation that Twitter and other websites surface through there engagement algorithms. This has resulted in journalism being packaged alongside the shock-value opinion shows that bring in the viewers/readers.

Sadly, a huge percentage of the country is unable to distinguish between news and opinion. (Also, many have no understanding of statistics and no patience for nuance.)

Amacfa said:
The difference is Twitter is a discussion platform, people can and will say what they want
Click to expand...
Not really a difference. Calling it a "discussion platform" or town square doesn't change that it's a private platform for various types of content. It's problem isn't too much moderation. It's problem is that it promotes bad information.
 
BaldiMac said:
If you can't follow the conversation, then there's no point in continuing it. Thanks.


I never said that it did.


There are good, objective journalists all over the place. The Republican party's play, lead by the former president, to discredit the whole industry notwithstanding.

The main problem in journalism is the same problem that you are arguing for on Twitter. Actual journalism has to compete with the ******** and misinformation that Twitter and other websites surface through there engagement algorithms. This has resulted in journalism being packaged alongside the shock-value opinion shows that bring in the viewers/readers.

Sadly, a huge percentage of the country is unable to distinguish between news and opinion. (Also, many have no understanding of statistics and no patience for nuance.)


Not really a difference. Calling it a "discussion platform" or town square doesn't change that it's a private platform for various types of content. It's problem isn't too much moderation. It's problem is that it promotes bad information.
Click to expand...
The old democrat playbook. Great thing about being an ex Obama/trump voter is independent thought. Maybe you’ll realize the Democrat party is just as bad, maybe worse, than the Republican Party.

99% of you posts summarize to: Republicans bad. Democrats good. No, both bad. Try not to tow the party line so much, makes it hard to take things you say seriously as your not exactly impartial.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: transpo1, jaymc and bumblebritches5
Amacfa said:
The old democrat playbook. Great thing about being an ex Obama/trump voter is independent thought. Maybe you’ll realize the Democrat party is just as bad, maybe worse, than the Republican Party.

99% of you posts summarize to: Republicans bad. Democrats good. No, both bad. Try not to tow the party line so much, makes it hard to take things you say seriously as your not exactly impartial.
Click to expand...
Except I'm not a Democrat. I've been registered as Independent my whole life. I'm a lifelong conservative that was abandoned by the Republican party.

I didn't say anything partisan in my post, so I assume that you are just taking issue with the fact that I said the Republican party, lead by the former president, made a specific effort to discredit the news media. That's not a partisan opinion. It was a plainly stated strategy by the former president.
www.cbsnews.com

Lesley Stahl: Trump admitted mission to "discredit" press

Veteran "60 Minutes" correspondent says Trump admitted attacking press so "no one will believe" negative stories about him
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
 
BaldiMac said:
Except I'm not a Democrat. I've been registered as Independent my whole life. I'm a lifelong conservative that was abandoned by the Republican party.

I didn't say anything partisan in my post, so I assume that you are just taking issue with the fact that I said the Republican party, lead by the former president, made a specific effort to discredit the news media. That's not a partisan opinion. It was a plainly stated strategy by the former president.
www.cbsnews.com

Lesley Stahl: Trump admitted mission to "discredit" press

Veteran "60 Minutes" correspondent says Trump admitted attacking press so "no one will believe" negative stories about him
www.cbsnews.com www.cbsnews.com
Click to expand...
Could have fooled me!
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: bumblebritches5 and jaymc
Amacfa said:
Could have fooled me!
Click to expand...
Sure. It's pretty common because many supporters of the current far-right Republican party view anyone to their left as radical left Democrats. I'm a conservative who believes in democracy, experts, and journalism. Free speech, empathy, and objective truth. I'm against buying elections (courtesy of citizens united), gerrymandering, and anything that prevents a citizen from voting. I'm for re-balancing the Senate to keep 30% of the country from having full control of the most important legistlative body in the country.

None of those are liberal ideas. The fact that today's Republican party supports none of those things is deplorable.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: jaymc
BaldiMac said:
Sure. It's pretty common because many supporters of the current far-right Republican party view anyone to their left as radical left Democrats. I'm a conservative who believes in democracy, experts, and journalism. Free speech, empathy, and objective truth. I'm against buying elections (courtesy of citizens united), gerrymandering, and anything that prevents a citizen from voting. I'm for re-balancing the Senate to keep 30% of the country from having full control of the most important legistlative body in the country.

None of those are liberal ideas. The fact that today's Republican party supports none of those things is deplorable.
Click to expand...
Oh, I believe you.! I can tell by how much you’ve wrote, lol!!
 
iObama said:
Literally what makes you think a car company CEO can save a social media company other than the fact that he’s rich?

I’ll never understand the blind loyalty to Elon Musk.
Click to expand...
You mean the car company CEO that will likely land humans on Mars before our stupid government can? I can't imagine why anyone would think he can fix a much easier problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jaymc, bumblebritches5 and dk001
Musk also wants to allow Vladimir Putin and the ISIS Remnant-Caliphate Leaders to return to Twitter if he is truly a freedom of speech absolutist. Otherwise, a hypocrite.

Imagine that he isn't a hypocrite and he DOES allow even the most fervent Putin-loving pro-Russians and Islamic terrorists to have their free voice on Twitter. Toss in a verified blue checkmark Kim Jong Un Twitter account, where Kimbo threatens to nuke or assassinate everyone on a daily basis.

My God.... it will be a glorious dumpster fire. I might actually enjoy it as premium entertainment.... more than (now-dead) Netflix, that's for sure.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️ and bumblebritches5
Solomani said:
Musk also wants to allow Vladimir Putin and the ISIS Remnant-Caliphate Leaders to return to Twitter if he is truly a freedom of speech absolutist. Otherwise, a hypocrite.

Imagine that he isn't a hypocrite and he DOES allow even the most fervent Putin-loving pro-Russians and Islamic terrorists to have their free voice on Twitter. Toss in a verified blue checkmark Kim Jong Un Twitter account, where Kimbo threatens to nuke or assassinate everyone on a daily basis.

My God.... it will be a glorious dumpster fire. I might actually enjoy it as premium entertainment.... more than (now-dead) Netflix, that's for sure.
Click to expand...
The reactions to this are already glorious.

B4096B64-B763-4759-A694-EABE613E655A.jpeg
8C9C4EBC-9660-4F78-8DB5-B8AD51569A08.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: bumblebritches5, BugeyeSTI and dk001
Elon Translated: Free speech is free speech... except for the stuff that annoys me... and we're going to use an algorithm to surface speech that I deem more valuable.

The fact that Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter would be completely under control of two billionaires should give anyone pause.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Angry
Reactions: H2SO4, iGeneo, jaymc and 1 other person
BaldiMac said:
Elon Translated: Free speech is free speech... except for the stuff that annoys me... and we're going to use an algorithm to surface speech that I deem more valuable.

The fact that Facebook, WhatsApp, and Twitter would be completely under control of two billionaires should give anyone pause.
Click to expand...
I distinctly remember being ignored when bringing this up during the last election cycle, but I was laughed at. Now that it’s in my favor, what should I do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back