Elon Musk

[Graham J]

I think this is a paradox Elon will face if he takes control of Twitter.

Absolutely. I ran a small community like TMC for a dozen years and realized long ago that moderation at scale is an intractable problem. No software can solve it absolutely and Facebook has proven that even paying vast quantities of people to do it can't solve it. All you can do is keep trying and try to keep the worst of humanity at bay.

Twitter is walking a very tight line, it won't take much for it all to come crumbling down. Any one person imposing their will on it could cause this but especially one who thinks the floodgates should be opened.

 

[golfcart]

I saw your post there. It's a pity that perspectives are so polarized now, making it difficult to even discuss the moderate. This is what concerns me about Musk's posts: he's a smart guy, he must see that utter freedom is as extreme as utter censorship, that there must be a middle ground. And further that biases must be considered, not just to correct the errors of the past, but to offset biases of the present - social, political and commercial.

Musk is immune to most of the harms of societal bias. As a public figure it's poor form for him to exacerbate them imo.

I'd have a slightly different take if I could get into it more (but I can't), but I see where you are coming from. To me the real issue now is that factually accurate things can also be considered "insensitive" or "racist" by certain groups standards. And if we get to the point that factually accurate things are not allowed to be said because they offend certain sensibilities then we go to a bad place.

 

[mspohr]

Surveys can yield meaningful data if they are properly designed (i.e. true random sample and unbiased questions). Many of the surveys you run across on the internet suffer from both biased sample and biased questions.
However, surveys are a valid research tool that are widely used in formal science.
So, yes, surveys can yield valid data.

 

[Graham J]

I'd have a slightly different take if I could get into it more (but I can't), but I see where you are coming from. To me the real issue now is that factually accurate things can also be considered "insensitive" or "racist" by certain groups standards. And if we get to the point that factually accurate things are not allowed to be said because they offend certain sensibilities then we go to a bad place.

Isn't that normal though? If I tell you you smell you'll be offended even if it's true

I think the main problem is people who aren't the ones being offended trying to decide whether the thing should be offensive. That's just not how it works. If a group claims that something is offensive or discriminatory towards them then others should accept that and willingly restrict their own freedom of speech for the greater good. Usually when people aren't doing that it's because they're trying to impose their own opinon on others and won't change their behaviour based on others.

We're all better off when we decide to respect other viewpoints and it's ok to disagree silently. This is what we tell our kids right? We should do it too.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

Possible - but he is steadily adopting language of the "un-woke" - to use his term.

I mean, he is basically adopting the language of the "unhappy 10% on the right", again to use his phrasing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1516483038242385928

I'm not sure using the language of the crowd that bans Math textbooks in Florida sends a "free speech" message.

I'm a little confused about this.

To me there is anything about "Woke" within the tweet.

It's simply stating that extremism is bad, and I would agree with that. Now this doesn't mean I agree that its an accurate statement, but I don't take issue with it.

What I see in all of this is really ignorance on the part of Musk.

He doesn't understand what really went down, and how social media companies allowed bad actors to continue to operate well after breaking a lot rules that normal people would get kicked off the platform for.

He also doesn't seem to understand the complexities of operating a Social Media company.

It's the same sort of misjudgment that led to thinking autonomous cars would be easy.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I think the main problem is people who aren't the ones being offended trying to decide whether the thing should be offensive. That's just not how it works. If a group claims that something is offensive or discriminatory towards them then others should accept that and willingly restrict their own freedom of speech for the greater good. We're all better off when we decide to respect other viewpoints. It's ok to disagree silently.

To one side that sounds like a very rational ask.
To the other side that sounds like a creative attempt to allow the other side to cry their way to what they want.

In reality it's really hard for social change to happen, and for people to adapt to a new normal.

If you're a bus driver that has southern hospitality deeply rooted in you it's going to be really hard to adjust to not making gendered based assumptions when greeting people getting on the bus. You'll have to give up something that's very much a part of you to accept them.

My nibling is constantly offended. What they want the world to be is very different from how the world is.

Language is how people defend their world view, and how they want things to be. Symbols are another thing people will use to defend their world view.

I've noticed especially with symbols that one side will define what the symbol means for the other side so a symbol means completely different things to the two groups.

One of my neighbors has a BLM banner
One of my neighbors has a thin blue line tire cover on their Jeep. They have connections to law enforcement.

Neither of them offends me, but other people are offended by the one who goes against their social identity. They'll google their way to being offended or to justify their offence.

It's also going to be impossible to ask a deeply religious and conservative person who strongly supports female sports to respect the rights of a transgendered individual to play female sports. They'll see it as ruining female sports. Where biological females won't be able to compete against transgendered ones. I'll remain sittings on the sidelines thinking there is no good solution.

In general it's really hard for people to give ground.

I would love to be able to watch a Star Trek Episode that wasn't all emo, but that's not how things are anymore. Even the ship computer had an emotional breakdown in one of the latest episodes. HBO used to have the sex and violence I enjoyed, but now its just a parade of fake penises.

Now I'm not really offended by either of those, but I do see how that drives people of a more conservative nature to push back.

 

[EVNow]

To me there is anything about "Woke" within the tweet.

See the original tweet. Follow the context.

What does this tweet mean ?

He seems to be saying shows that do not discriminate based on race, gender, nationality etc. are not watchable.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1516600269899026432

It's simply stating that extremism is bad, and I would agree with that. Now this doesn't mean I agree that its an accurate statement, but I don't take issue with it.

BTW, are you saying you agree with the below ? It is equating two "extremes" - which may not be extremes at all. For eg. Gandhi and Hitler are not equivalents even if some might say they are right and left extremes. Advocating for genocide and advocating for peace and not equivalent.

A social media platform’s policies are good if the most extreme 10% on left and right are equally unhappy

But I agree with rest of your post. Musk has no idea about complexity around "free speech" or how to handle them. He thinks Nazis should have the same rights as everyone else and Jewish people should just develop "thick skin" (like he told his AA employees to do in an email). There was (and still is) an unbelievable amount of abuse that happens on twitter and is meant to drive away people. That is not "free speech".

Anyway, this is what I posted in another thread.

Every country has rules about what is allowed and what is not allowed. No country has as absolute free speech. Elon is saying he wants twitter to just stick to that and not do anything extra. Which kind of makes sense - except there is a big problem on social media.

Can one person use their "free speech" to shut off others free speech ? Yes - it happens all the time. And that obviously runs counter to the idea of free speech. If you really make it free for all - abusive and obnoxious people take over the entire social network. They drive rest of the people away.

In real world it is not that much of a problem because people naturally separate out. I don't go to places where I expect to see abusive speech and when those people come to my social circle, they observe the tacit rules of this social space. Doesn't work on twitter.

 

[golfcart]

Isn't that normal though? If I tell you you smell you'll be offended even if it's true

I think the main problem is people who aren't the ones being offended trying to decide whether the thing should be offensive. That's just not how it works. If a group claims that something is offensive or discriminatory towards them then others should accept that and willingly restrict their own freedom of speech for the greater good. Usually when people aren't doing that it's because they're trying to impose their own opinon on others and won't change their behaviour based on others.

We're all better off when we decide to respect other viewpoints and it's ok to disagree silently. This is what we tell our kids right? We should do it too.

The flip side of this is that you can weaponize offense and status. It is a race to the bottom. You are only right if you are highest on the hierarchy of oppression rather than actually correct. Then people use that power to influence policy and before you know it the identity of the people involved in a conflict supersedes the actual particulars of the conflict.

I get it, the world isn't fair to everyone and we should try to help folks that are victims of that unfairness... but the pendulum often swings way too far and overcorrects.

 

[FlatSix911]

See the original tweet. Follow the context. What does this tweet mean ?
He seems to be saying shows that do not discriminate based on race, gender, nationality etc. are not watchable.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1516600269899026432

BTW, are you saying you agree with the below ? It is equating two "extremes" - which may not be extremes at all. For eg. Gandhi and Hitler are not equivalents even if some might say they are right and left extremes. Advocating for genocide and advocating for peace and not equivalent.

But I agree with rest of your post. Musk has no idea about complexity around "free speech" or how to handle them. He thinks Nazis should have the same rights as everyone else and Jewish people should just develop "thick skin" (like he told his AA employees to do in an email). There was (and still is) an unbelievable amount of abuse that happens on twitter and is meant to drive away people. That is not "free speech".

Anyway, this is what I posted in another thread.

Here is a simple explanation...

 

[mspohr]

Elon Musk poised to collect $23bn bonus as Tesla beats targets

Electric car giant’s CEO says he is not in talks on new bonus scheme after completing 2018 deal early

www.theguardian.com

Elon Musk, chief executive of Tesla and the world’s richest person, is set to collect a $23bn (£17.6bn) bonus after the electric car company’s reported record quarterly profits.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

See the original tweet. Follow the context.

What does this tweet mean ?

He seems to be saying shows that do not discriminate based on race, gender, nationality etc. are not watchable.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1516600269899026432

I don't read it that way.

I think it's related to his tweet complaining that SF&F shows don't have enough SF&F.

But he should answer people and give examples, or just admit he was being hyperbolic in response to being disappointed about a show.

 

[EVNow]

Here is a simple explanation...

So, you think its all the LGBTQ stuff ? I don't think (unlike, apparently, what you wish him to be) Elon is a homophobe.

Thats why likened him to Peter Thiel.

ps : One aspect of Elon Musk I don't see discussed much is that he was born and brought up in South Africa in the 80s and 90s, moving to Canada in 1989.

What happened in South Africa in 80s & 90s ? An upheaval because of dismantling of Apartheid. The white supremacist privilege crumbled. I wonder how much that affected him. I've not seen him talk much about it.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

He seems to be saying shows that do not discriminate based on race, gender, nationality etc. are not watchable.

Ah, I can't make head or tails of that tweet.

My issue with Netflix is the lack of quality content, but I don't think I'll unsubscribe due to having enough content that warrants the monthly fee. Like I'm currently watching Season two of the Russian Doll.

AppleTV+ has really been the star streaming wise for me. Even I was surprised about how pissed off I was at the season ender of Severance. The fact that I was pissed was an indicator of how much it drew me in. Haha.

 

[3Volts2aTes]

I have to guess this isn't a serious question.

Not really…most surveys are full of poorly formed questions and skewed sample populations. The vast majority, once you look closely, do nothing but lead to a pre-drawn conclusion.

 

[wdolson]

I saw your post there. It's a pity that perspectives are so polarized now, making it difficult to even discuss the moderate. This is what concerns me about Musk's posts: he's a smart guy, he must see that utter freedom is as extreme as utter censorship, that there must be a middle ground. And further that biases must be considered, not just to correct the errors of the past, but to offset biases of the present - social, political and commercial.

Musk is immune to most of the harms of societal bias. As a public figure it's poor form for him to exacerbate them imo.

Elon Musk is one of the top industrial engineering geniuses alive today. He made electric cars affordable and desirable and he made access to space cheaper. He had a lot of help from a lot of engineers to do it, but both were his visions.

Just because he has genius in one area doesn't mean he is a genius in all areas. His pronouncements on the COVID crisis were mostly wrong. He's also admitted to being on the autism spectrum. People on the low end of the spectrum are blind to social queues neurotypical people can see without a second thought. To put it in intelligence terms, their social intelligence is not exactly high.

Smart people on the spectrum can learn how to compensate. Bill Gates had a crash course that took years, but he's able to manage somewhat now. But through him into a social situation he hasn't prepped for and he would be lost at sea.

Someone I knew years ago was on the board of the Los Angeles county Mac users group. Bill Gates came to an event they put on to announce Word for the Mac. This was before he was married and since she was the only single member of the board, they seated her next to Gates. She said he had the worst table manners she had ever seen and seemed to be in his own world most of the time. He made his announcement and abruptly left.

Surveys can yield meaningful data if they are properly designed (i.e. true random sample and unbiased questions). Many of the surveys you run across on the internet suffer from both biased sample and biased questions.
However, surveys are a valid research tool that are widely used in formal science.
So, yes, surveys can yield valid data.

Political polls are essentially a form of survey. When new factors creep in they can get inaccurate and people like to dump on their inaccuracies, but much of the time political polling can be quite accurate. Good pollsters work hard to account for every factor they can think of that might skew a poll. Creating good, unbiased questions is an art form too.

Polls and surveys can be very bad. Some are deliberately bad to skew public opinion with the way the questions are asked.

 

[mspohr]

Twitter will have to navigate the chasm between"free speech absolutism" and this law...

EU agrees on landmark law aimed at forcing Big Tech firms to tackle illegal content

The European Union agreed on new digital regulations Friday that will force tech giants like to police illegal content on their platforms more aggressively.

www.cnbc.com

A key part of the legislation would limit how digital giants target users with online ads. The DSA would effectively stop platforms from targeting users with algorithms using data based on their gender, race or religion. Targeting children with ads will also be prohibited.

 

[mspohr]

Free speech is not simple.

‘Democracy will wither’: Barack Obama outlines perils of unregulated big tech in sweeping speech

In a keynote address at Stanford University, the former president made his most extensive remarks yet about the tech landscape

www.theguardian.com

Technology companies must be reined in to address the “weakening of democratic institutions around the world”, Barack Obama said Thursday, in a sweeping keynote speech on the perils of disinformation


Obama’s speech called attention to the grave impacts of disinformation and misinformation – including manipulation of the 2016 and 2020 elections and the rise of anti-vaccination sentiments.

He was candid about regrets he had surrounding Donald Trump’s election, saying his administration had long known that Russia had incentive to manipulate US democracy but he underestimated the effectiveness of the efforts.

“What still nags at me is my failure to appreciate at the time just how susceptible we had become to lies and conspiracy theories,” Obama said.

A Senate panel report in 2020 found conclusively that Russia had interfered in the 2016 elections to sway votes in favor of Trump, echoing findings from a prior report published by the Department of Justice.

 

[Matias]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517707521343082496

 

[ohmman]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1517707521343082496

Imagine seeing this tweet from Elon 8 years ago. People would assume his account had been hacked. So goes the slow trajectory.

This is some middle-school nonsense. I sadly still stand by my assessment of Twitter.

 

[RubberToe]

Imagine seeing this tweet from Elon 8 years ago. People would assume his account had been hacked. So goes the slow trajectory.

This is some middle-school nonsense. I sadly still stand by my assessment of Twitter.

Sure, but if Bill Gates is shorting Tesla, he is clueless. And what I mean by clueless, is that Tesla's mission statement is to transition the world to sustainable energy. If you are betting against that, you aren't on board. Period.

RT