“Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”(twitter.com)
twitter.com
“Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1593673339826212864
392 comments
I'm certainly not a fan of how Musk has handled the Twitter takeover, but this sentiment, "New Twitter policy is freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach", seems highly reasonable to me, no?
That is, what I find so awful about most social media (and places like YouTube) is how they focus on some of the most anger-inducing content for "engagement". That is, I think the problem is much more their algorithms than what people actually post.
That said, I think that, realistically, being at the bottom of the heap won't actually be much different from being banned - which I actually think is a good thing.
That is, what I find so awful about most social media (and places like YouTube) is how they focus on some of the most anger-inducing content for "engagement". That is, I think the problem is much more their algorithms than what people actually post.
That said, I think that, realistically, being at the bottom of the heap won't actually be much different from being banned - which I actually think is a good thing.
So free speech absolutist is starting to adapt rules which are roughly similar to Twitter's current rules. And those rules are existing for a reason, rules don't popup from a thin air. What a surprise...
Now he will figure out that the bloat of microservices and employees was there also for a reason.
Now he will figure out that the bloat of microservices and employees was there also for a reason.
Note that this is the dictionary definition of shadowbanning, which is the primary thing the free speech advocates on Twitter were hoping Elon would stop Twitter from doing.
Further in the thread he names some banned accounts that will be reinstated.
A couple weeks ago, Elon said that Twitter’s content policy (and account reinstatement) would be decided by a moderation council composed of people with diverse views. There have been no reports of this council being formed yet.
Edit: why was this post flagged?
A couple weeks ago, Elon said that Twitter’s content policy (and account reinstatement) would be decided by a moderation council composed of people with diverse views. There have been no reports of this council being formed yet.
Edit: why was this post flagged?
So, what percentage of Musk's tweets would be max deboosted? Examples start about halfway down the list.
https://www.insidehook.com/article/tech/elon-musk-worst-twee...
https://www.insidehook.com/article/tech/elon-musk-worst-twee...
Oh great, more unaccountable black-box "algorithms" that invisibly classify your tweets. Machines can't detect satire, they don't understand nuance or context, they don't understand tone. This will affect platform speech in strange ways as people naturally attempt to evade the algorithm.
Twitter needs a dislike button. Every social media platform needs a mechanism for explicit negative feedback. Yes, people will use it to downvote ideas they don't like. Yes, it will come with its own challenges. That's how real life works. It doesn't make that speech disappear, it just deprioritizes it.
Given that he already wants to do this, it's better to let humans have input than to pretend as if algorithms know what's best for us.
Twitter needs a dislike button. Every social media platform needs a mechanism for explicit negative feedback. Yes, people will use it to downvote ideas they don't like. Yes, it will come with its own challenges. That's how real life works. It doesn't make that speech disappear, it just deprioritizes it.
Given that he already wants to do this, it's better to let humans have input than to pretend as if algorithms know what's best for us.
Elon “free speech” Musk.
>Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted & demonetized.
Guess this guy finally realized that a free for all model is not feasible.
>Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted & demonetized.
Guess this guy finally realized that a free for all model is not feasible.
The worst aspect of twitter is the anti-fans who follow people just to disrupt any conversations that they're having, and the organized trolling groups. You could interpret this is saying that those people are going to be pushed out of threads, but you could interpret it in any way. He's really not saying anything.
The organized groups and the anti-fans would be easy to automate discovery of. Just flag people who reply in a similar manner no matter what they're replying to, and cross them with voting rings. Declaring war on negativity and hate is pretty silly, though.
The organized groups and the anti-fans would be easy to automate discovery of. Just flag people who reply in a similar manner no matter what they're replying to, and cross them with voting rings. Declaring war on negativity and hate is pretty silly, though.
There's still a question of how "negative/hate" is defined and whether this will be transparent. I'm skeptical, but the general principle of discouraging and not profiting from negativity is, uh, positive.
So they will treat the following two tweets differently?
• down with people who believe X!
• long live people who believe not-X!
The line between negativity and positivity is just a matter of framing.
• down with people who believe X!
• long live people who believe not-X!
The line between negativity and positivity is just a matter of framing.
I’m confused about what’s actually being suggested here, if anything. Regardless of whether stuff is “boosted” and “monetized” or not, people can still retweet stuff, right?
If they’re going to restrict the ability to retweet, that sounds a lot like shadow-banning, which is exactly what many people complain about, the people Musk seems to be listening to.
I guess it makes sense if people are really using the “home timeline” rather than chronological. That just seems bizarre to me as it misses the whole essence of Twitter. How is it a real-time news source if the newest stuff isn’t always front and centre? How is it a crowd-sourced “public square” if a black box algorithm decides what you read, rather than your own hand-curated list of followed accounts?
This whole debate would make sense if it were about YouTube, but Twitter?
If they’re going to restrict the ability to retweet, that sounds a lot like shadow-banning, which is exactly what many people complain about, the people Musk seems to be listening to.
I guess it makes sense if people are really using the “home timeline” rather than chronological. That just seems bizarre to me as it misses the whole essence of Twitter. How is it a real-time news source if the newest stuff isn’t always front and centre? How is it a crowd-sourced “public square” if a black box algorithm decides what you read, rather than your own hand-curated list of followed accounts?
This whole debate would make sense if it were about YouTube, but Twitter?
I've discovered that if you tweet the name "Michael Griffin" + "Elon" (or "Musk"), nobody will see your tweet organically unless they search for it directly.
Michael Griffin is an important person in Elon's real (non-mythical) history that he'd probably rather you not know about,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Griffin#Career
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Griffin#Career
I'm excited to see what the new policy will be tomorrow.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is the sort of damage control id expect to see from someone only peripherally aware of or involved in their businesses accountability or strategic operations. This concern from advertisers has existed far too long for an executive action to have any meaning. the marketing conference call on november 3rd was your red flag where advertisers voiced their displeasure with firing large swaths of the content moderation team. The checkmark fiasco that wiped billions off corporate ledgers on a friday of active trading left a pretty sore spot with them as well that you never seemed to completely address. To corporations looking at this release today youre just some guy dragging a plumbing fixture through the lobby of your new office demanding hardcore work and cutting staff and --lets be honest-- at least Chainsaw Al Dunlap made stockholders rich in the process of scorching earth. So far youve just made the entire platform look like the bombing of dresden.
by the 14th most reasonable advertisers had paused their spend if not backed out entirely.
but after the bombshell office lockout and mass exodus today? to think a ToS change with a skeleton crew of H1B's and lifers that arent even allowed at their desks is going to reverse the course of decline is farcical. This is the kind of massive failure that triggers disaster recovery plans. This ship is sinking, and whatever life thats valued on it will either jump ship to a competing platform or Mastodon. You took a 44bn USD risk and managed to absolutely destroy any credibility in your leadership in under a month. At this point its best to hope markets dont start reconsidering your other companies as risky business.
by the 14th most reasonable advertisers had paused their spend if not backed out entirely.
but after the bombshell office lockout and mass exodus today? to think a ToS change with a skeleton crew of H1B's and lifers that arent even allowed at their desks is going to reverse the course of decline is farcical. This is the kind of massive failure that triggers disaster recovery plans. This ship is sinking, and whatever life thats valued on it will either jump ship to a competing platform or Mastodon. You took a 44bn USD risk and managed to absolutely destroy any credibility in your leadership in under a month. At this point its best to hope markets dont start reconsidering your other companies as risky business.
Musk's vision for Twitter has finally been realized: if you want to whistleblow or say not nice things about Tesla, SpaceX, or Musk himself, no one will see it. Nothing bad about him or his companies will trend on Twitter ever again.
Sounds like a complicated moderation position to take. "Negative" and "hate" are a matter of perspective and Twitter is a global product. What meets a legal definition of "hate" in one nation is state-sponsored "religious belief" in another. Do you weigh the tweets differently based on who's looking at it?
I'm by no means a proponent of the fediverse but this is one arena it has a leg up in. Federators are free to draw their own cultural borders online rather than relying on a centralized for-profit company to draw them. (Or leave them undrawn, which has been Twitter's stance so far.)
I'm by no means a proponent of the fediverse but this is one arena it has a leg up in. Federators are free to draw their own cultural borders online rather than relying on a centralized for-profit company to draw them. (Or leave them undrawn, which has been Twitter's stance so far.)
The main reason some of us go on Twitter is it is where the politicians and other leaders tweet. It is the only place where we can talk back to them. This talking back is probably considered negative. If our voices will be silenced, I will just subscribe to a few of the people still there using RSS feeds. All real discussion will move elsewhere.
Pretty much going according to plan. Next step will be tweets from the political left being downranked by the algorithm/shadowbanned because Elon considers them “hate speech”.
Hasn't he figured out that whatever the rules end up people will game them for their own benefit? Dynamic system next to impossible to police.
Now I'm curious how many of his tweets would count as "negative"
I think he's heading towards making people pay for reach to try to get more subscription revenue. In my opinion paying for reach is what started Facebook's decline, when people realize that "your" followers are not actually theirs they lose interest.
What's the point of demonitizing a tweet? Its not like youtube where the author is getting a share of the profits.
I'm not using twitter (and not going to), so please explain, what that means, exactly. So, let's say it is decided by Musk&co that X (written by xxx) is a hateful Tweet.
- I am a follower of xxx. Will I see it?
- I specifically go to twitter.com/xxx. Will I find X on that page?
- X is a reply to a popular thread I'm reading right now. Will I see X?
So, what exactly being "deboosted" means on Twitter? It just won't appear among all the recommended trash on some "most popular" feed, or does it mean that it's basically invisible unless I somehow guess the specific ID of that tweet?
- I am a follower of xxx. Will I see it?
- I specifically go to twitter.com/xxx. Will I find X on that page?
- X is a reply to a popular thread I'm reading right now. Will I see X?
So, what exactly being "deboosted" means on Twitter? It just won't appear among all the recommended trash on some "most popular" feed, or does it mean that it's basically invisible unless I somehow guess the specific ID of that tweet?
The interesting question to me is whether Twitter will still allow a strictly reverse chronological feed of tweets from accounts you follow. It's been getting harder and harder to hold onto that as a user.
[deleted]
Demonetized? Was anyone getting paid by twitter to tweet?
What does deboosted mean? Does twitter show you tweets from people you don't follow (and people you follow don't retweet)? Or does that mean you won't see the tweets from the people you follow?
Fumbling forward, path still unclear. Who and how is negative determined?
Is opposing oppression considered to be negative? Sentiment analysis of the protest orientated tweets would probably deem them so
what's the difference between a valid criticism and negativity? it would be hard enough to identify "hate", but "negative"...that leaves a lot of room for interpretation.
Here's one example quote from June, 2022:
“I think there’s this big difference between freedom of speech and freedom of reach in that one can, obviously, let’s say in the United States go in the middle of Times Square and pretty much yell anything you want. You’ll annoy the people around you, but you’re kind of allowed to just sort of yell whatever you want in a crowded public place, more or less, apart from 'this is robbery' — probably that would get you in trouble.
“So but then whatever you say, however controversial, does not need to then be broadcast to the whole country. So I think generally the approach of Twitter should be to let people say what they want to do within the bounds of the law, but then limit who sees that...”
Source: https://www.teslarati.com/elon-musk-china-censorship-twitter...