-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon & Twitter
- Thread starter Buckminster
- Start date
- Status
He has improved himself for sure but his main two convictions have remained the same for 20 years. Twitter is just ensuring the the top two remain valid. And yes, he entertains himself along the way. He has a secondary chimp brain like the rest of us and needs to feed it bananas otherwise his priorities could again become at risk from himself.
First principles and doesn't miss a beat. Love him.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It's going to be a biased social media service dominated by people willing to give Elon money to be there, the exact opposite of a town square. Hasn't Elon stated that polls can only be voted on by blue check holders? How obvious can the bias get?
Why?
Why would a poll by blue checks be a biased one? You can claim it reflects a smaller set of the Twitter population, but why would you think it will be biased?
How unbiased was it before, when the bots were running amok?
Might be worth learning about some important biases. In this case:
That page doesn’t talk about bias thru Bots.
So the self serving "selection bias" argument goes something like this:
The Left says, 'I won't pay for the blue check. Why should I pay Elon-the-fraud any money?' The same Left turns around and says, 'the blue checks are dominated by the Right, so the polls are skewed. So Twitter polls are worthless.'
Twitter polls were always worthless before, due to bots. Now the anti-Musk crowd is worried this new method might actually make it meaningful, and they might get exposed on major social issues. So they are working on several angles to make Twitter irrelevant.
Modus operandi is:
- Musk-the-fraud has made Twitter a place for racists, hate speech, enables violence, anti-Semitic, verification failure.. yada yada
- so I will not pay him any money and give that platform any legitimacy. Also $8 will break my family and make me poor.
- because I am not represented well enough, any polls will be biased.
- because it will be biased, Twitter polls (and as an extension Twitter itself) are irrelevant.
I am not participating because the platform is biased. Because I am not there, the platform is biased.
So the self serving "selection bias" argument goes something like this:
The Left says, 'I won't pay for the blue check. Why should I pay Elon-the-fraud any money?' The same Left turns around and says, 'the blue checks are dominated by the Right, so the polls are skewed. So Twitter polls are worthless.'
Twitter polls were always worthless before, due to bots. Now the anti-Musk crowd is worried this new method might actually make it meaningful, and they might get exposed on major social issues. So they are working on several angles to make Twitter irrelevant.
Modus operandi is:
- Musk-the-fraud has made Twitter a place for racists, hate speech, enables violence, anti-Semitic, verification failure.. yada yada
- so I will not pay him any money and give that platform any legitimacy. Also $8 will break my family and make me poor.
- because I am not represented well enough, any polls will be biased.
- because it will be biased, Twitter polls (and as an extension Twitter itself) are irrelevant.
I am not participating because the platform is biased. Because I am not there, the platform is biased.
Last edited:
It's biased because everyone voting paid a fee so per the article, if you surveyed 10 doctors and 9 said this product is the best, a lot of those surveys don't state that all those doctors lived in that area, etc or some other selection biased (or possible paid). Like you ask 10 russians and have a survey/vote that 90% of people (with how the survey is conducted) state the war is justified, then your poll is already biased.
If I chose to not give Elon my $$, or I chose to not give anyone $ because I am cheap/poor, I can't vote. You simply axe out all those people not willing or able to spend $$ for whatever reasons. $1000/month for any small news outlet is impossible and a non-starter probably. I guess you're happily giving Elon your $8 or $11 now?
I like news free. Twitter is not even a news source, but a pointer to the actual news articles so what are you paying for other than pointing people to another location?
Like this forum, if you asked what was the best solar battery solution, Tesla will win probably because that's all the people here and that's all they know. You go to another forum and you get another set of results. You ask Twitter users and that alone gives you a set of biased answers from only paid Twitter users soon (as a non-twitter user myself).
I thought you also left and unsubbed? You are spending a lot of time here and you will never will change anyone's mind, but this thread is a good one for time wasting for sure.
On bots, there are probably also pro Elon bots and anti Elon bots. I thought Elon can kill all bots with a thought and bots are no more now?
News is like anything - you get what you pay for.
If it is free - you are the product. And receiving biased data paid for by oil companies etc.
7Bn people in this world - Elon is building a town square that is as fair as possible to all of them. That means communicating to and receiving. $7 is affordable to everyone in the western world even if it is just for a month or as part of a group - just a matter of priorities.
If it is free - you are the product. And receiving biased data paid for by oil companies etc.
7Bn people in this world - Elon is building a town square that is as fair as possible to all of them. That means communicating to and receiving. $7 is affordable to everyone in the western world even if it is just for a month or as part of a group - just a matter of priorities.
The irony of this statement is quite rich and thick and flowing like tar on a hot day.
Almost every news outlet today is behind a paywall. You have to pay to read.
In Twitter it is free. Only content creators pay the price of a cup of coffee per month.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Just because Elon screamed "bots" every time he lost a poll doesn't mean they were bots voting. The fact that you don't see the obvious bias of only Elon fans paying for a blue check being able to vote says it all.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
No you don't, there are usually ways around it or other news sites quickly pick it up and provide it for free. I never pay for any news.
Would you do a poll on the popularity of the NFL by polling only people who attend NFL games? Or what about people who are at sports bars on Sundays during NFL season? Or how about polling only people who happened to be at Disneyland during the Super Bowl?
Did Elon put an edict that only his fans should pay for blue-check?
The anti-Elon crowd is the one taking the ball home and then blaming Musk: "I won't be a party to your blue-check , because your platform is biased. Because I am not there, your platform is biased"
The whole argument is a manufactured one to make Twitter irrelevant.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It's not manufactured it's what's happening. It doesn't matter why people are "taking the ball home", i.e. choosing not to pay, it just matters that it's happening. Unless Elon is a complete idiot then he knows the people willing to pay will be more biased in his direction.
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
No, it's people with legacy checkmarks that don't want to pay for something that was both free and had meaning.
You don't have to be anti-Elon to understand the significance of the change, nor disagree with it.
I am scratching by head here, and this equivalence just doesn't make any sense at all. Makes zero sense.
Blue check is available for everyone who can afford to drink a cup of coffee or two. Sure that leaves a set of population who are cheap or poor, but it still gets a huge section of population. And this selection of people who can afford to pay for blue-check is not constrained by ANY race, ideology, age, color, sexual orientation or any bias - except - those that cannot afford pay for it.
Now comes the self-serving argument - I will not pay because Twitter is biased and not legitimate. Because I am not there, Twitter polls are not legitimate.
philw1776
Member
Reporting slur against us with Scottish ancestry.
I am not disagreeing that 'taking the ball home' is not happening. It is the reasoning given as to why they do that is manufactured.
Okay lets ponder this statement and dig deeper.
Why would someone with legacy check suddenly feel it lost its meaning? The Dan Hulls and the Lora Kolodnys of Bloomberg and CNBC are still the same - with the same meaning and legitimacy - as before.
They and another small select group of people who had legacy checks dominated Twitter's airways . Now they will have to compete with the marketplace of other people who have the same number of followers and reach. Just because you represent MSM doesn't give you a bigger mouth piece for your lies.
Now this scares them. They are worried their biased opinions and lies do not carry the same weight and reach as before. They will be exposed much more easily.
- Status
