Elon Musk Wants Apple to Lower Fees for 'X' Creators

[ultra16]

The site formerly known as Twitter is shedding creators at a furious rate. The ones that remain are increasingly extremist right wingers, idiotic conspiracy nut jobs, white supremacist and other trolling racists.

Where is the evidence to support this? I doubt there’s anyone here particularly interested in your baseless claims, but I could be wrong. Show us the credible information that has led you to believe this is true. That should have been included already…

 

[Surf Monkey]

Where is the evidence to support this? I doubt there’s anyone here particularly interested in your baseless claims, but I could be wrong. Show us the credible information that has led you to believe this is true. That should have been included already…

The expected empty “objection.”

https://www.axios.com/2022/11/12/elon-musk-twitter-racist-tweets-data

Report: Tweets with racial slurs soar since Musk takeover

The number of posts on Twitter containing racial slurs has soared since Elon Musk purchased the influential platform, new research shows.

apnews.com

Elon Musk is accused by advertisers of 'perpetuating racism' on Twitter

Companies continue to steer clear of posting ads on Twitter as hateful speech remains a problem.

fortune.com

Why is Elon Musk’s Twitter takeover increasing hate speech?

Musk’s acquisition of Twitter and his potential plans to loosen moderation guidelines will exacerbate the proliferation of hate speech and likely inhibit the ways that marginalized groups mobilized on the platform to combat racism and discrimination.

www.brookings.edu

You are being redirected...

www.adl.org

Musk threatens to sue researchers documenting the rise in hateful tweets

An attorney for the platform recently wrote to the Center for Countering Digital Hate accusing the group of trying to hurt the site's advertising.

www.pbs.org

Elon Musk Is Turning Twitter Into a Haven for Nazis

Musk has welcomed neo-Nazis back onto the platform, engaged with them on his timeline, and posted multiple tweets that appeal directly to them.

www.vice.com

Twitter allows Nick Fuentes back despite antisemitism, white supremacy

Twitter has reinstated the account of Nick Fuentes, who espouses antisemitic and white supremacist view and leads the “America First” movement, after he was banned from the social media site in Jul…

thehill.com

Are athletes, coaches and sports journalists of color enabling white nationalism by staying on Twitter? | Opinion

Since Elon Musk acquired Twitter, the firewall between the lowest form of humanity, and legitimate users of Twitter, has collapsed.

www.usatoday.com

Etc.

 

[deckard666]

Well he is Mr Walk Back -

It’s time to change how we cover Elon Musk

Musk keeps making things up — and the press keeps covering it credibly.

www.theverge.com

 

[Sasha-1]

Well he is Mr Walk Back -

It’s time to change how we cover Elon Musk

Musk keeps making things up — and the press keeps covering it credibly.

www.theverge.com

Musk was the one who made the challenge. Seems he is way too scared to fulfill it now. Maybe he'll get a doctor's note regarding some bone spurs and will not be able to fight...

 

[ultra16]

The expected empty “objection.”

https://www.axios.com/2022/11/12/elon-musk-twitter-racist-tweets-data

Report: Tweets with racial slurs soar since Musk takeover

The number of posts on Twitter containing racial slurs has soared since Elon Musk purchased the influential platform, new research shows.

apnews.com

Elon Musk is accused by advertisers of 'perpetuating racism' on Twitter

Companies continue to steer clear of posting ads on Twitter as hateful speech remains a problem.

fortune.com

Why is Elon Musk’s Twitter takeover increasing hate speech?

Musk’s acquisition of Twitter and his potential plans to loosen moderation guidelines will exacerbate the proliferation of hate speech and likely inhibit the ways that marginalized groups mobilized on the platform to combat racism and discrimination.

www.brookings.edu

You are being redirected...

www.adl.org

Musk threatens to sue researchers documenting the rise in hateful tweets

An attorney for the platform recently wrote to the Center for Countering Digital Hate accusing the group of trying to hurt the site's advertising.

www.pbs.org

Elon Musk Is Turning Twitter Into a Haven for Nazis

Musk has welcomed neo-Nazis back onto the platform, engaged with them on his timeline, and posted multiple tweets that appeal directly to them.

www.vice.com

Twitter allows Nick Fuentes back despite antisemitism, white supremacy

Twitter has reinstated the account of Nick Fuentes, who espouses antisemitic and white supremacist view and leads the “America First” movement, after he was banned from the social media site in Jul…

thehill.com

Are athletes, coaches and sports journalists of color enabling white nationalism by staying on Twitter? | Opinion

Since Elon Musk acquired Twitter, the firewall between the lowest form of humanity, and legitimate users of Twitter, has collapsed.

www.usatoday.com

Etc.

The first link does not support an increasingly racist/white-supremacist/conspiracy-theorist body of users. It says there were jumps in certain key words within the *one week after* the acquisition. This exact link also states the outgoing safety head say they had reduced racist/anti-semitic tweets by up to 95% from pre-acquisition levels...

The second article merely cites the same information as the first article, from November 2022. This was 3 weeks after the takeover, or the first <10% of the time Twitter/X has been under new management.

The third link was also written in November 2022 and cites the same data as the first two links as well as a study from 2021, before the acquisition.

The fourth article was written in December 2022 and notes accounts that were reinstated by Twitter after a poll with a 72% majority voted that they'd like to see banned accounts reinstated. And once again, it cites data on racism etc. from November 2022.


The fifth article does not support anything you claimed. It's a different topic than those you mentioned, but I suppose your shotgun approach can take credit for the claim that Twitter is the only social media platform that did not improve its LGBTQ safety score according to this research group from 2022-2023. Although it mentions how much other companies' scores rose, it hides how much Twitter's decreased, interestingly...

Sixth article: is about Musk himself, not aggregated data about the platform. It's also written in November 2022, and lists some people they're accusing of being white supremacists (correctly for all I know). It doesn't make claims about the overall user-base of the platform and obviously can't make claims about the 90% period of post-acquisition time that occurred after November 2022.

At the 7th article we finally reach something written in the past 8 months (January), but it's just about one person...

Your final article is behind a paywall, so unless you have a USA Today subscription I'm assuming you just threw this one in there for fun... It's actually written in March, but it's an opinion piece and the first visible paragraph mentions November 2022 as well...


So, hopefully we've learned our lesson. You have to see that data before you make up your mind. You can't make up your mind and then go on a Google excursion hoping to find information that supports what you said (or fail to find information that supports what you said). If you can provide information to support what you're saying, that would be fantastic, and I'd be inclined to believe you... but you're 0 for 2 in that regard...

 

[Surf Monkey]

The first link does not support an increasingly racist/white-supremacist/conspiracy-theorist body of users. It says there were jumps in certain key words within the *one week after* the acquisition. This exact link also states the outgoing safety head say they had reduced racist/anti-semitic tweets by up to 95% from pre-acquisition levels...

The second article merely cites the same information as the first article, from November 2022. This was 3 weeks after the takeover, or the first <10% of the time Twitter/X has been under new management.

The third link was also written in November 2022 and cites the same data as the first two links as well as a study from 2021, before the acquisition.

The fourth article was written in December 2022 and notes accounts that were reinstated by Twitter after a poll with a 72% majority voted that they'd like to see banned accounts reinstated. And once again, it cites data on racism etc. from November 2022.


The fifth article does not support anything you claimed. It's a different topic than those you mentioned, but I suppose your shotgun approach can take credit for the claim that Twitter is the only social media platform that did not improve its LGBTQ safety score according to this research group from 2022-2023. Although it mentions how much other companies' scores rose, it hides how much Twitter's decreased, interestingly...

Sixth article: is about Musk himself, not aggregated data about the platform. It's also written in November 2022, and lists some people they're accusing of being white supremacists (correctly for all I know). It doesn't make claims about the overall user-base of the platform and obviously can't make claims about the 90% period of post-acquisition time that occurred after November 2022.

At the 7th article we finally reach something written in the past 8 months (January), but it's just about one person...

Your final article is behind a paywall, so unless you have a USA Today subscription I'm assuming you just threw this one in there for fun... It's actually written in March, but it's an opinion piece and the first visible paragraph mentions November 2022 as well...


So, hopefully we've learned our lesson. You have to see that data before you make up your mind. You can't make up your mind and then go on a Google excursion hoping to find information that supports what you said (or fail to find information that supports what you said). If you can provide information to support what you're saying, that would be fantastic, and I'd be inclined to believe you... but you're 0 for 2 in that regard...

What a mountain of useless rationalizations.

Isn’t it curious how some Musk acolytes have a problem denouncing racism and white supremacy?

 

[ultra16]

What a mountain of useless rationalizations.

Isn’t it curious how some Musk acolytes have a problem denouncing racism and white supremacy?

Everything above is strictly factual. Sorry that you couldn’t back up what you’ve said. That final assertion of yours is borderline reportable… arguing that your point was incorrect is not a failure to denounce racism or white supremacy (which I think are both outrageously unacceptable, if I really have to say it). And frankly, you know better.

 

[splifingate]

He’s not going to terraform Mars. That’s science fiction.

Maybe not directly, but--I can only guess--he's read (if not internalized) Paul Anderson's "Harvest of Stars" series in the guise of might-I-become Anson Guthrie

 

[guerro]

Care to list some of those to back up your position?

Nope.

(You are now ignored)

 

[Surf Monkey]

They are streaming rights, they are paying for eyeballs. The exclusivity is why there is competitive bidding.

If the league let three other services match Apple's price, then it devalues what apple pays for by (at least) 2/3rds.

The leagues don't have to give exclusive streaming rights, but they should be prepared for the offers to drop by well over half, as well as a lot of interest to drop off.

What makes Apple different is that they want worldwide exclusive rights. For some parties (like MLS), thats huge because it gives them a huge boost in worldwide coverage - and they weren't going to get comparable bids in other markets anyway.

CarPlay isn't an exclusivity play though. Most receivers support a native OS, as well as CarPlay and Android Auto. CarPlay is basically an App in the car's native OS - it basically turns the car's console into an external screen to the phone. It is purposely designed to be pretty easy to support on the car side, because they can't dictate significant CPU/storage requirements and aren't coding bespoke apps onto manufacturer's platforms.


It is an indicator in the "doesn't care what his customers want" column at most.


Hypothetically if Tesla cared even more than they do today about what their customers wanted, they'd share their good and valid reason for not supporting CarPlay.

In regard to live sports, Apple is (IMO) really the one in the power position in light of the amount of raw cash they can throw on the table. The reality the leagues face is declining broadcast revenue as people basically abandon live television. What they want is the same kind of exclusive deals they’ve grown to rely upon with big broadcasters like NBC. Securing that kind of revenue stream is critical for the survival of the leagues themselves.

 

[hooptyuber]

In light of posts made by many of the most ardent Musk acolytes in this very thread it’s blatantly obvious that the exact opposite of your assertion is true.

Posts like this are just bizarre. Musk and the new Twitter are denounced here in florid, shrieking, hysterical, foot-stamping tantrum posts alleging that anyone who doesn't also hate Musk and the new Twitter is a “Nazi! Nazi! Naaaaaazi!!!” and a white supremacist.

The total intolerance and unreasoning hysteria from “the tolerant” is hypocritical and childish.

 

[tripsync]

The first link does not support an increasingly racist/white-supremacist/conspiracy-theorist body of users. It says there were jumps in certain key words within the *one week after* the acquisition. This exact link also states the outgoing safety head say they had reduced racist/anti-semitic tweets by up to 95% from pre-acquisition levels...

The second article merely cites the same information as the first article, from November 2022. This was 3 weeks after the takeover, or the first <10% of the time Twitter/X has been under new management.

The third link was also written in November 2022 and cites the same data as the first two links as well as a study from 2021, before the acquisition.

The fourth article was written in December 2022 and notes accounts that were reinstated by Twitter after a poll with a 72% majority voted that they'd like to see banned accounts reinstated. And once again, it cites data on racism etc. from November 2022.


The fifth article does not support anything you claimed. It's a different topic than those you mentioned, but I suppose your shotgun approach can take credit for the claim that Twitter is the only social media platform that did not improve its LGBTQ safety score according to this research group from 2022-2023. Although it mentions how much other companies' scores rose, it hides how much Twitter's decreased, interestingly...

Sixth article: is about Musk himself, not aggregated data about the platform. It's also written in November 2022, and lists some people they're accusing of being white supremacists (correctly for all I know). It doesn't make claims about the overall user-base of the platform and obviously can't make claims about the 90% period of post-acquisition time that occurred after November 2022.

At the 7th article we finally reach something written in the past 8 months (January), but it's just about one person...

Your final article is behind a paywall, so unless you have a USA Today subscription I'm assuming you just threw this one in there for fun... It's actually written in March, but it's an opinion piece and the first visible paragraph mentions November 2022 as well...


So, hopefully we've learned our lesson. You have to see that data before you make up your mind. You can't make up your mind and then go on a Google excursion hoping to find information that supports what you said (or fail to find information that supports what you said). If you can provide information to support what you're saying, that would be fantastic, and I'd be inclined to believe you... but you're 0 for 2 in that regard...

Fantastic job. I always hate it when people think they can slide on by posting a few links that don't prove anything.

 

[constantsnags!]

Fantastic job. I always hate it when people think they can slide on by posting a few links that don't prove anything.

I hate it when petulant billionaires reinstate accounts that share abuse. You should too.

 

[tripsync]

I hate it when petulant billionaires reinstate accounts that share abuse. You should too.

Nah, I rather just block accounts on X I don't like reading.

 

[ultra16]

Fantastic job. I always hate it when people think they can slide on by posting a few links that don't prove anything.

Exactly. There will always be people that believe if you don't naively assume a righteous position is credible, you are part of the problem. It's a false dichotomy, obviously. I told someone to qualify their claims, and when I pointed out that they had not, I quite literally got accused of "failing to denounce racism and white supremacy". People fall into this trap thinking that if there's an opportunity to choose the morally superior side of an issue, then that's who they'd like to be, facts be damned. And in this case, they never even attempted to make a single argument. It was an ignorant claim, ten dramatic headlines, an inappropriate accusation, and a childish emoji response... not one argument.

In our society, defending a criminal is not an attempt to have a criminal walk free. It's an attempt to ensure the charge is valid. Due process and facts are important.

Asking someone to provide credible evidence to support a claim that X is increasingly filled with racists and white supremacists is not an attempt to defend racism and white supremacy. It's an attempt to check the credibility of the claim. It's an attempt to ensure we don't fall into blind lunacy to stroke our moral egos. Checking for facts does not rule out the possibility that the claim is true, but the contrary. It validates the claim and reinforces its integrity... if it is correct. There's nothing wrong with critically thinking about things.

 

[constantsnags!]

Nah, I rather just block accounts on X I don't like reading.

Ah, so you're ok it's there as long as you don't have to see it. Check.

 

[tripsync]

Ah, so you're ok it's there as long as you don't have to see it. Check.

🤦‍♂️
You do know that X isn't the end all be all communication platform, right? Play this out and you'll realize it's far better to block on X than having someone in your feed grab content from a different platform to replay that speech you don't want to see in your feed.

 

[constantsnags!]

🤦‍♂️
You do know that X isn't the end all be all communication platform, right? Play this out and you'll realize it's far better to block on X than having someone in your feed grab content from a different platform to replay that speech you don't want to see in your feed.

You do know that any and everyone sharing that kind of crap, or facilitating it, should be behind bars for the rest of their lives, right? I don't care which platform it's on. When you shrug it off by blocking it, you're doing nothing.

 

[tripsync]

You do know that any and everyone sharing that kind of crap, or facilitating it, should be behind bars for the rest of their lives, right? I don't care which platform it's on. When you shrug it off by blocking it, you're doing nothing.

That's not anyone else's job but for the authorities. Blocking it on Twitter causes the streisand effect.

 

[constantsnags!]

That's not anyone else's job but for the authorities. Blocking it on Twitter causes the streisand effect.

Nah. It's every decent human being's responsibility to protect the vulnerable...and therein lies the problem.

 

[tripsync]

Nah. It's every decent human being's responsibility to protect the vulnerable...and therein lies the problem.

Talking about two separate things. Illegal speech obviously shouldn't be allowed. Legal speech you don't like should be allowed.

 

[ultra16]

You do know that any and everyone sharing that kind of crap, or facilitating it, should be behind bars for the rest of their lives, right? I don't care which platform it's on. When you shrug it off by blocking it, you're doing nothing.

Then report them to the authorities and they’ll be prosecuted. We already have a legal system, we don’t need a redundant extrajudicial layer just to satisfy your personal appetite for righteousness. There’s already a centuries-refined legal system subject to democratic review every couple of years that governs this. Don’t be naive in thinking that the reason you disagree with it is because it’s wrong.

 

[hooptyuber]

You do know that any and everyone sharing that kind of crap, or facilitating it, should be behind bars for the rest of their lives, right? I don't care which platform it's on. When you shrug it off by blocking it, you're doing nothing.

Sharing or “facilitating” what? Speech you disagree with? It's amazing how hostile some people are to the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. All varieties of opinions are allowed in the US. It doesn't matter if some people disagree with them. I disagree with people every day but I don't demand they be silenced. That's not how a free society works.

 

[constantsnags!]

Sharing or “facilitating” what? Speech you disagree with? It's amazing how hostile some people are to the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. All varieties of opinions are allowed in the US. It doesn't matter if some people disagree with them. I disagree with people every day but I don't demand they be silenced. That's not how a free society works.

You know fine well what I’m referring to. Stop standing up for the billionaire. It’s actually sad.

 

[redbeard331]

Posts like this are just bizarre. Musk and the new Twitter are denounced here in florid, shrieking, hysterical, foot-stamping tantrum posts alleging that anyone who doesn't also hate Musk and the new Twitter is a “Nazi! Nazi! Naaaaaazi!!!” and a white supremacist.

The total intolerance and unreasoning hysteria from “the tolerant” is hypocritical and childish.

Sharing or “facilitating” what? Speech you disagree with? It's amazing how hostile some people are to the 1st Amendment and the US Constitution. All varieties of opinions are allowed in the US. It doesn't matter if some people disagree with them. I disagree with people every day but I don't demand they be silenced. That's not how a free society works.

Do when are you guys going to lobby for the removal of ag-gag laws which are true attacks on the 1st Amendment???

Attacks on the 1st were ok until people reacted negatively to Musk un-suspending accounts of those who cannot be named.

Says a lot.