EPTI still don't know what your point is. Do you not understand that Twitter users made money through Twitter prior to Elon Musk? Is that completely unbeknownst to you? Like, just admit it. You don't have to try every single attack angle against the person who hates a fascist.
Elon Musk's lies, propaganda, etc. - Page 17
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
I still don't know what your point is. Do you not understand that Twitter users made money through Twitter prior to Elon Musk? Is that completely unbeknownst to you? Like, just admit it. You don't have to try every single attack angle against the person who hates a fascist. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5901 Posts
On November 11 2024 04:14 Magic Powers wrote: I still don't know what your point is. Do you not understand that Twitter users made money through Twitter prior to Elon Musk? Is that completely unbeknownst to you? Like, just admit it. You don't have to try every single attack angle against the person who hates a fascist. You never seem to know what extraordinarily obvious points are. They had no sharing of ad revenue until 2023, and most of their quarters before 2022 were net losses. How do you suppose they are able to afford raking ad revenue back to their users only after Elon tanked the company? What does their balance sheet look like? | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On November 11 2024 04:31 oBlade wrote: You never seem to know what extraordinarily obvious points are. They had no sharing of ad revenue until 2023, and most of their quarters before 2022 were net losses. How do you suppose they are able to afford raking ad revenue back to their users only after Elon tanked the company? What does their balance sheet look like? These are all questions you're supposed to answer if you're defending Elon Musk. The known facts paint Musk's Twitter as a failure and you're grasping at straws. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5901 Posts
| ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
On November 11 2024 05:13 oBlade wrote: Oh okay let me try and answer it. How could they possibly afford to share ad revenue with their users from 2023, only after Elon bought the company, when they didn't once before he bought it. Got it: He's not running it into the ground. That site/app is the 15th biggest social network in the world, up from the 17th when he bought it. It's not about "afford". Twitter simply... didn't. They didn't pay users directly before Musk's purchase. Has nothing to do with their (in)ability to do so. This has absolutely nothing to do with Twitter being as valuable as before. The value has been reported to have declined by 80%. You have never disputed that and yet you claim that Twitter is just fine. This makes no sense. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5901 Posts
The owner may in fact have non fiduciary reasons to purchase it at a hundred million dollars that outweigh other considerations. To outsiders who aren't the owner and can't see the accounting up close, the second person being paid when they weren't paid last year can be a clue to the positive financial health of the company. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26270 Posts
On November 11 2024 05:39 Magic Powers wrote: It's not about "afford". Twitter simply... didn't. They didn't pay users directly before Musk's purchase. Has nothing to do with their (in)ability to do so. This has absolutely nothing to do with Twitter being as valuable as before. The value has been reported to have declined by 80%. You have never disputed that and yet you claim that Twitter is just fine. This makes no sense. Isn’t it also tied in to the whole ‘X blue’ thing as well? The other side of sharing ad revenue is that unless you get gifted it, you also gotta pay to be eligible right? But also you get boosted in visibility at the same time? Is my vague understanding of it anyway, feel free to correct. Aside from the monetary mechanics of it, I also don’t like this kind of pivot. Even early doors, Twitter was never some absolute paradise. But when it did work well it was in somewhat organic, user-less breaker of news and whatnot. Or a place to connect with public figures and see what they thought about subjects. Public figures could enjoy those connections, or build their brand etc. To me these changes disrupt the kind of fundamental elements of the platform. It seems to me to be somewhat baking in a two-tier user system, as well as directly (further) incentivising users into various methods of driving clicks and outrage versus quality discourse. YouTube has plenty of flaws too, but revenue sharing makes sense given it’s a video content platform and users provide said content. Content that takes comensurately more effort to make. I’ve largely stopped paying much attention to Twitter land, so I may be way off base, that was my impression when I was keeping a keener eye. | ||
|
Fleetfeet
Canada2645 Posts
On November 11 2024 06:20 WombaT wrote: Isn’t it also tied in to the whole ‘X blue’ thing as well? The other side of sharing ad revenue is that unless you get gifted it, you also gotta pay to be eligible right? But also you get boosted in visibility at the same time? Is my vague understanding of it anyway, feel free to correct. Aside from the monetary mechanics of it, I also don’t like this kind of pivot. Even early doors, Twitter was never some absolute paradise. But when it did work well it was in somewhat organic, user-less breaker of news and whatnot. Or a place to connect with public figures and see what they thought about subjects. Public figures could enjoy those connections, or build their brand etc. To me these changes disrupt the kind of fundamental elements of the platform. It seems to me to be somewhat baking in a two-tier user system, as well as directly (further) incentivising users into various methods of driving clicks and outrage versus quality discourse. YouTube has plenty of flaws too, but revenue sharing makes sense given it’s a video content platform and users provide said content. Content that takes comensurately more effort to make. I’ve largely stopped paying much attention to Twitter land, so I may be way off base, that was my impression when I was keeping a keener eye. Hah yeah I've already heard of essentially parasitic users that earn an income simply by posting incendiary or otherwise targeted shit at big users. Because the ad/revenue/monetization is connected to impressions (read - people just being exposed to your 'content') you're best served as a smaller user by leeching off an Elon Musk or whoever. As long as people see and react to your stuff, you don't care what you actually contribute. From the sound of it, it sounds like being a 'professional youtube commenter' who just goes around to 10m view videos and tries to craft the -perfect- joke for maximum likes... except with less actual value. (I haven't looked into this personally, my only sources are effectively hearsay.) | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26270 Posts
On November 11 2024 09:53 Fleetfeet wrote: Hah yeah I've already heard of essentially parasitic users that earn an income simply by posting incendiary or otherwise targeted shit at big users. Because the ad/revenue/monetization is connected to impressions (read - people just being exposed to your 'content') you're best served as a smaller user by leeching off an Elon Musk or whoever. As long as people see and react to your stuff, you don't care what you actually contribute. From the sound of it, it sounds like being a 'professional youtube commenter' who just goes around to 10m view videos and tries to craft the -perfect- joke for maximum likes... except with less actual value. (I haven't looked into this personally, my only sources are effectively hearsay.) Regardless of your sources it seems bang on the money. I don’t think one even needs sources, just based on past experience on such such platforms work and logical extrapolation. That’s just how it’s going to go I could probably make money getting my wee blue tick and amplifying the most obscure, niche story about DEI or wokeness and hey I’ll get some cash doing this. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23659 Posts
On November 11 2024 10:02 WombaT wrote: Regardless of your sources it seems bang on the money. I don’t think one even needs sources, just based on past experience on such such platforms work and logical extrapolation. That’s just how it’s going to go I could probably make money getting my wee blue tick and amplifying the most obscure, niche story about DEI or wokeness and hey I’ll get some cash doing this. It's a job AI is taking almost as fast as it is being created. Not uncommon for one of the parasitic users to get copy pasted by an AI account that then ends up with more likes and impressions than the actual human user that came up with it (probably with the help of GPT in the first place lol). | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26270 Posts
On November 11 2024 11:46 GreenHorizons wrote: It's a job AI is taking almost as fast as it is being created. Not uncommon for one of the parasitic users to get copy pasted by an AI account that then ends up with more likes and impressions than the actual human user that came up with it (probably with the help of GPT in the first place lol). Chat GPT is like, shockingly, remarkably good at stuff like this. On volume us humans can’t compete with it. I have a decently written CV but I asked it to tweak it for like 9 slightly different jobs based on my original baseline that I provided. Did it very well actually, impressive That would have taken me a considerable amount of time. I still had to make some minor tweaks but it basically nailed it. Thing is, I still need an actual decent CV at the end of the day. If I have no impediment whatsoever in terms of ultimate quality I can just perpetually generate angry articles about how DEI is bad and be alright. So long as people click on them | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23659 Posts
On November 11 2024 11:54 WombaT wrote: Chat GPT is like, shockingly, remarkably good at stuff like this. On volume us humans can’t compete with it. I have a decently written CV but I asked it to tweak it for like 9 slightly different jobs based on my original baseline that I provided. Did it very well actually, impressive That would have taken me a considerable amount of time. I still had to make some minor tweaks but it basically nailed it. Thing is, I still need an actual decent CV at the end of the day. If I have no impediment whatsoever in terms of ultimate quality I can just perpetually generate angry articles about how DEI is bad and be alright. So long as people click on them As the internet turns increasingly into a (non-)human centipede of AI generated content being botfarmed by AI engagement, to sell AI guided advertisements, for AI generated consumables, to AI players of games... (EDIT: I meant to finish this thought with some hope that maybe some kids will start to unplug as a result and that might be a way out, but also...) I think the humans might have accidentally already set off a chain of events sorta like the paperclip problem, but instead of the AI making paperclips, it's us making the AI. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5901 Posts
On November 11 2024 06:19 Magic Powers wrote: Alright whatever, if you don't acknowledge a simple fact then I think this discussion between the two of us about Twitter is over. Do you think other people's job is just repeat what you already said ad nauseam and repeat it yourself when they don't? On November 11 2024 06:20 WombaT wrote: Isn’t it also tied in to the whole ‘X blue’ thing as well? The other side of sharing ad revenue is that unless you get gifted it, you also gotta pay to be eligible right? But also you get boosted in visibility at the same time? Is my vague understanding of it anyway, feel free to correct. Could be they just have far less operating costs from firing so many people? Like 80% right? | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4384 Posts
Plus the whole charging a monthly subscription fee for the blue check marks was a pretty smart idea, most of the blue checkmark folks have such big egos they'll cough up the money. | ||
|
Razyda
901 Posts
On November 11 2024 01:33 WombaT wrote: The whole thread is just ignoring things that are inconvenient to one’s perceptions and responding to things that are more fertile ground, or sidestepping into unrelated domains. Across the board also I’m trying to straddle some kind of reasonable, nuanced middle ground and people just consistently sidestep either my posts entirely or certain elements within in order to either argue with their own strawman, or the more extreme arguments, or to just introduce completely different arguments Hey people have the right, but it’s done nothing to particularly convince me that Musk fanboys or anti-fans are engaging in any kind of evolving, evidence-based discussion bolded - Because it is a vent thread, there is a reason why it started after Musk backed Trump and shortly before election. On November 10 2024 22:23 Magic Powers wrote: You've so successfully sidetracked from Elon Musk's failed hyperloop that you don't even realize that you're arguing with a strawman. I've showed how that massive project you hate is actually within reason. I'm not here to argue what I think about it, my personal opinion about it is irrelevant and I'm not here to defend it. You've so quickly moved the goalpost from Elon Musk's failure that you think this discussion was all about California the whole time. It wasn't. It's a whataboutism of the highest order. This thread isn't about other failures in the world, that can be discussed all you want. Make a thread for it if you like, maybe people will listen. It's about people's wrong perception of Elon Musk's brilliancy. He's running Twitter to the ground, his hyperloop has failed, and I can name a whole host of other failures in his career that people such as yourself are apologizing for. On November 10 2024 23:21 Magic Powers wrote: Yeah, believe whatever you want. Twitter succeeding before Musk and then after the purchase turning into a right-wing echo chamber, censorship hellhole, and financially crashing is definitely unrelated to Musk. Sure, dream on. Italic - will deal just with this one quickly - this is simply detached from reality. bolded - Arguing that Musk buying twitter and running it the way he does is some sort of proof of his incompetency is just... wow. Basing this on Twitter valuation shows some shallowness in thinking. Think of Twitter as a tool, basically with buying twitter he bought power and a lot of it. You may argue whether Twitter tipped the scales in recent election, but you cant really argue that it helped. Now Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/nov/09/elon-musk-trump-administration Title says it all: How Elon Musk became Donald Trump’s shadow vice-president. What a failure he is... | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7090 Posts
| ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4478 Posts
No, I didn't start the thread because I'm petty. I started it because I had enough of Elon Musk interfering with politics after he interfered with our Austrian politics in particular when fascists were voted into power. He lied about how our politics works because he doesn't understand a single thing about anything that he posts on Twitter 500 times a day and in the process he causes chaos and mayhem. He's a far-right maniac who needs to be stopped. Also, you people have terrible priorities. You're defending the richest person on the planet who is supporting fascism in America and other countries and lied about his transgender daughter to make himself look better. You're defending a horrible person. | ||
|
Harris1st
Germany7090 Posts
On November 11 2024 21:50 Magic Powers wrote: lmao so now people are pivoting from "Elon Musk contributes to his companies" to "Elon Musk succeeded because he helped get a fascist into power". Funny. No, I didn't start the thread because I'm petty. I started it because I had enough of Elon Musk interfering with politics after he interfered with our Austrian politics in particular when fascists were voted into power. He lied about how our politics works because he doesn't understand a single thing about anything that he posts on Twitter 500 times a day and in the process he causes chaos and mayhem. He's a far-right maniac who needs to be stopped. Also, you people have terrible priorities. You're defending the richest person on the planet who is supporting fascism in America and other countries and lied about his transgender daughter to make himself look better. You're defending a horrible person. Not sure who you are replying to, but here goes anyway: Most if not all of us know he is a shitty human being, but that doesn't take away that he has been quite successful in his endeavours. One has nothing to do with the other. It probably makes it even more so. | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12391 Posts
| ||
| ||
