D
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
- Status
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
So many funny parallels going both ways.
VW moved on from and survived the Nazis by not supporting them anymore, will Tesla eventually do the same with Musk? Erase him from their company history? If buyers don't want to support Musk there's other options for electric vehicles.
If Alyssa's not talking about current day VW she may be associating VW with the Love Bug.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
If she gets one virtue signal tweet per time I beat off to her teets in the 90s, she’s probably got plenty left in the bank.
Biff
Member
The irony of Wil Wheaton criticizing another human being for having an army of fools.
His entire career is exploiting geek culture to the point where parasocial neckbeards fork over $50 for a picture with him on his never-ending circuit of regional Comic Cons.
FunkMiller
Member
I think the one thing we can probably all agree on is that social media has done an extremely good job of highlighting how utterly self absorbed by their own sense of importance a lot of celebrities truly are.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Tesla has sold over 3 million cars so far and it's growing fast. When it comes to cars, Tesla is always among the top brands discussed. I'm not a fan of EV cars as I like the selection and practicality of gas cars, but I got to say I tip my hat he got the company going. It's even profitable.
On the other hand, when was the last time anyone brought up Wil Wheaton?
The guy is so desperate for money, as you said he even does signings for cash. That's when you know an actor or retired athlete is over the hill or desperate.
Grildon Tundy
Member
Totally. Social media and especially Twitter encourage that feedback loop of inflated ego. I get it though. I mean, if I get like 3 or more reactions on a GAF post I'm all
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Not that I care about Wheaton, but he gets regular voice acting work and small live action TV roles. Even if he were only earning the guild minimum he's fine.
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
Wanting proper moderation of hate speech and other similar dangerous behavior does not mean I support "Authoritarianism".
I shouldn't even have to explain that ffs. Some of you are just being ridiculous with all of this
Tams
Member
Stephen Elop.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
first let’s establish what you would consider to be “proof?”
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
In his tweet regarding "Freedom of speech, but not "Freedom of Reach" he said that it would not be "super boosted" even if you pay for your checkmark and that the only way you would see it is if you look for it "which is no different than the rest of the internet" etc etc blah blah blah.
For reference.
No mention of moderation. No mention of deletion. Only that the content will allegedly be shoved to the bottom via some algorithm or system. So the hate speech is there and it will not be moderated, but just won't be set alongside ads or seen "unless you specifically seek it out". Which is patently false because I have seen plenty of hate speech in the comments of various tweets since that post. I've lost track of how many times I have seen slurs in recent weeks just by going through the comments of various tweets that I have seen. Not just in tweets either. The amount of slurs I have seen in people's usernames has climbed dramatically as well.
He also made it a point to say that the account itself will not be "deboosted or demonetized". Just the hateful tweets themselves.
So even if an account is spamming hateful content that get "deboosted and demonetized" the account itself will still have the rest of its tweets boosted accordingly. Thus allowing hateful accounts to still have reach when paid for. So extremists can still spew their bile and people can still seek it out if they want. It just won't get the same treatment as normal Tweets from a paid account. Which solves exactly nothing because the hate and the possibility for violence that it causes is still there to be found.
I don't see how being against that makes me a fan of "Authoritarianism" because it seems pretty plain to me that is a dogshit policy to have, but here we are.
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Do you have any sources showing that other companies negotiated new ad campaigns? And who exactly are these companies? Perhaps you have evidence of a new auction Twitter held in this "vacuum" to target those now unserved audiences so these mystery companies could bid on it? Also this void left behind includes spending from some of the largest ad buyers in the world - some who spend over $100m annually across various platforms.
Because common sense tells us that those advertisers already locked into campaigns they've done paid for aren't going to double down for an additional campaign when they already have one or more running. It doesn't work that way.
I could see small actors perhaps taking advantage of some cheaper ad opportunities now, sure. But "Jimmy Earl Ray's Gas Station & Subway Sandwich Shop, off interstate exit B55 next to the smoke stacks, we also have grandma's homemade pecan pies too!, sure as hell ain't going to be spending Coca-Cola and Meta type money.
Edit: various typos
Last edited:
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
I feel like this is something that everyone can agree on at the very least.
Slurs and threats themselves should be an insta-ban or at the very least suspension. That is a black and white area.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Unless someone has proof of net advertising revenue plummeting down the drain, nobody knows what's going on.
Howard Stern during his heydays made the most money, yet if you ever listened to him the advertisers were all weird companies and products. It seemed all the big corporations avoided advertising on his radio breaks. Yet somehow it must be good money from the remaining advertisers to pay for the show and his giant salary.
nush
Member
I googled, only hits were the press saying advertisers were leaving, they sure wont report that vacuum being filled after the fact. We do know active users are actually up since the buyout. So... operational costs down, user activity up and nobody is taking advantage of that? Don't think so.
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
The only study that I'm aware of that analyzed user account activity was from earlier in the month and concluded there was a (proportionally) tiny decrease:
Twitter may have lost more than a million users since Elon Musk took over
Estimates from Bot Sentinel suggest that more than 875,000 users deactivated their accounts between October 27 and November 1, while half a million more were suspended.
www.technologyreview.com
As for any figures Musk offered, as with anything he claims, huge grain of salt. That said I do find it completely believable that user counts and activity have been growing in the weeks following that study as old users return and others have become more engaged watching the drama. I just can't find anything to confirm that assumption.
nush
Member
This is old, but if anyone has the time to dive into any cost differences since then is welcome to,
www.digitalwebsolutions.com
How Much Does It Cost To Advertise On Twitter? - DWS
Twitter advertising has become an essential part of the modern marketer's toolkit. However, one common question that businesses often ask is how much does it
www.digitalwebsolutions.com
Guilty_AI
Member
Don't wanna read all of this right now but if you want the source, its here. Its behind a paywall but there are ways *wink* *wink*.
Gist of it is:
-Advertisement spending is down, but not "end-of-the-world" down as some sensacionalist articles are trying to paint: first two weeks of November saw $25.7 million on Twitter ads compared with $29.3 million in the first two weeks of September.
Here are tables of the top spenders on advertisement from september compared to november, and from november compared to how much they spent on september:
You can clearly see some companies increased their spending considerably. Whether that reason had anything to do with Musk or others leaving, admitedly, is my own conclusion. But then again, you could question the same about a lot the companies who left or decreased spending "silently".
Last edited:
BadBurger
Many “Whelps”! Handle It!
Don't wanna read all of this right now but if you want the source, its here. Its behind a paywall but there are ways *wink* *wink*.
Gist of it is:
-Advertisement spending is down, but not "end-of-the-world" down as some sensacionalist articles are trying to paint: first two weeks of November saw $25.7 million on Twitter ads compared with $29.3 million in the first two weeks of September.
Here are tables of the top spenders on advertisement from september compared to november, and from november compared to how much they spent on september:
You can clearly see some companies increased their spending considerably. Whether that reason had anything to do with Musk or others leaving, admitedly, is my own conclusion. But then again, you could question the same about a lot the companies who left or decreased spending "silently".
Thanks, and yea I already removed the paywall
Reading nowEdit: Done. It's a small sample, and understandably only covers two weeks ago. Also of note (from this article) is that some of these buyers who increased spending Nov 1 to Nov 15 then paused all spending afterwards, such as Macy's. But I guess it does show that at least some advertisers did increase spending during the first fifteen days of the month.
Edit 2: Say someone was to print this page to PDF to share with the rest of the fam, is that OK here on GAF?
Last edited:
pramod
Banned
Well last i checked, racial slurs like the N word will still get your account automatically suspended.
pramod
Banned
In his tweet regarding "Freedom of speech, but not "Freedom of Reach" he said that it would not be "super boosted" even if you pay for your checkmark and that the only way you would see it is if you look for it "which is no different than the rest of the internet" etc etc blah blah blah.
For reference.
No mention of moderation. No mention of deletion. Only that the content will allegedly be shoved to the bottom via some algorithm or system. So the hate speech is there and it will not be moderated, but just won't be set alongside ads or seen "unless you specifically seek it out". Which is patently false because I have seen plenty of hate speech in the comments of various tweets since that post. I've lost track of how many times I have seen slurs in recent weeks just by going through the comments of various tweets that I have seen. Not just in tweets either. The amount of slurs I have seen in people's usernames has climbed dramatically as well.
He also made it a point to say that the account itself will not be "deboosted or demonetized". Just the hateful tweets themselves.
So even if an account is spamming hateful content that get "deboosted and demonetized" the account itself will still have the rest of its tweets boosted accordingly. Thus allowing hateful accounts to still have reach when paid for. So extremists can still spew their bile and people can still seek it out if they want. It just won't get the same treatment as normal Tweets from a paid account. Which solves exactly nothing because the hate and the possibility for violence that it causes is still there to be found.
There is no way someone can continually spam racial slurs and not get their account suspended. Just a few days ago i experimented by just tweeting an N word and my account was automatically suspended for 3 days. So what you are saying is not possible.
But if you are talking about other stuff rather than racial slurs, then we need to define what exactly "hate speech" is. And if its possible at all to detect all such speech without hiring thousands of humans to scan tweets and making their own biased judgements as to what is or not "hate speech"? Because thats clearly not sustainable or scalable, just like how its impossible to moderate the entire internet.
Last edited:
Nobody_Important
“Aww, it’s so...average,” she said to him in a cold brick of passion
His actual tweet disagrees. He was very clear on what was going to happen. Explicitly clear actually and very specific in his wording.
Don't tell me he didn't mean what he said otherwise the whole house of cards falls.
Last edited:
Mobilemofo
Member
I remember everything that happened. Fucking window mobile. They die a hard death and purchase Nokia, and kill them off too. Stephen elop. Twat
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I hope Twitter is as open as possible so I can read the laughs and users going hyperspastic over 140 character limit tweets on a free site.
But there's a sliding scale of "freedom of speech". It all comes down to where on the ladder someone feels is right for a social media site. Here's the scale. Everyone's sliding scale will be different, but it's likely something like this.
One person's tolerance is different than another on the pecking order of what is acceptable as their "freedom of speech". So "freedom of speech" isn't even the same for everyone. One person's "hate speech" is their "freedom of speech".
100% free for all (no moderation)
- Anything goes. Porn, drug trading, pedo etc... zero moderating
- Crime related stuff is cut out
- Above is cut out and also graphic visual content
- Above is cut out and also extreme text (insults to race and religion)
- Above is cut out and also less extreme insults (ie. you're a fat pig)
- Above is cut out and also swear words
Mother Teresa moderation
Last edited:
nush
Member
Selective quoting and a link to the original is accepted.
A few posts apart.C'mon guys, we're getting close to that Musk == Hitler stage, we can do it
It's really sad that people are diluting what Nazis actually did and the atrocities of the Holocaust. Nothing compares to that. Nothing. They created a final solution to systematically murder people. I hope people stop comparing them to today's events and people.
Unknown Soldier
Member
LegendOfKage
Member
The "advertising as entertainment" thing is something I've considered before. My thought was if he can work advertising tweets into basic twitter feeds in a way that ad blockers can't detect, that would be absolutely massive. Not sure if that's even possible, though. If not, just making them seamless for people who don't use an ad blocker would be pretty big.
Last edited:
Fans contribute to it with their celebrity worship and personality cultishness with white knighting on their behalf.
In terms of perceived importance the diluted change in blue checks will be interesting as the checks were seen as a singular symbol of status equal to institutions and businesses.
What's really sad is concern trolling.
funkygunther
Banned
it‘s really worrisome how we’ve come to this, as a society
murmulis
Member
What does the "n-word" mean?
If you answer then you get automatically suspended without taking any context into account. Don't you love our robot overlords?
I don't know your post history so maybe I read that at face value.
pramod
Banned
I think he was talking about violent tweets? It would make no sense if he removes the racial slur filters, which is like the simplest and most effective moderation tool.
Tams
Member
Most public corporate mole and Trojan Horse in modern history. What a cunt.
America, you owe Europe a massive apology for that twat. Not that Nokia's greedy European shareholders were blameless, but Elop is the one who pushed it all through.
Last edited:
strange headache
Banned
In his tweet regarding "Freedom of speech, but not "Freedom of Reach" he said that it would not be "super boosted" even if you pay for your checkmark and that the only way you would see it is if you look for it "which is no different than the rest of the internet" etc etc blah blah blah.
For reference.
No mention of moderation. No mention of deletion. Only that the content will allegedly be shoved to the bottom via some algorithm or system. So the hate speech is there and it will not be moderated, but just won't be set alongside ads or seen "unless you specifically seek it out". Which is patently false because I have seen plenty of hate speech in the comments of various tweets since that post. I've lost track of how many times I have seen slurs in recent weeks just by going through the comments of various tweets that I have seen. Not just in tweets either. The amount of slurs I have seen in people's usernames has climbed dramatically as well.
He also made it a point to say that the account itself will not be "deboosted or demonetized". Just the hateful tweets themselves.
So even if an account is spamming hateful content that get "deboosted and demonetized" the account itself will still have the rest of its tweets boosted accordingly. Thus allowing hateful accounts to still have reach when paid for. So extremists can still spew their bile and people can still seek it out if they want. It just won't get the same treatment as normal Tweets from a paid account. Which solves exactly nothing because the hate and the possibility for violence that it causes is still there to be found.
I don't see how being against that makes me a fan of "Authoritarianism" because it seems pretty plain to me that is a dogshit policy to have, but here we are.
You interpretation of these tweets is completely false. Have it straight from Elon himself:
The real reason for tall the hatemongering against him is this:
The establishment media simply cannot allow this to happen, that is why they are whipping their audience into a frenzy. They are the true enablers of hate, not Musk.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
The counter narrative however, cannot be right wing. Because then you are just replacing one destructive, biased, and divisive narrative with another.
Centre ground. Balance. That's what Musk has to strive for, and I'm not convinced by the way he talks that he understands that.
Tams
Member
Yeah, I don't think he does.
The man can't even tweet a single complete sentence. It's all just half thoughts, that most people disgard or at least keep to themselves.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
Then he's doomed.
I know a lot of people would just love it if Twitter suddenly became a place where far right wing opinion was allowed as much freedom as far left wing opinion has been granted - as some sort of partisan 'revenge'... but the only way Twitter flourishes is to provide a balanced environment, with sensible moderation. Swinging wildly from one terrible ethos to another is just going to kill it off altogether.
ManaByte
Member
Mobilemofo
Member
Nokia could have gone android. I was ready for the next step. Had meego, which was good and could have evolved, but I was ready for an android/Nokia future. I never would have left (unless the product was shit
). Ahhh..what could have been.
Tams
Member
They could have, but that would have been a real shame. They'd just be a bigger HMD Global.Nokia could have gone android. I was ready for the next step. Had meego, which was good and could have evolved, but I was ready for an android/Nokia future. I never would have left (unless the product was shit
Maemo/Meego was great. The N9, where it was actually released, sold extremely well. The Lumia 800 came out later as they had to pretty much add Windows Phone to the same hardware. Windows Mobile was nowhere near as good and imaginative as Meego back then (though I will say that WP was pretty cool).
And as maligned as Symbian was, by Belle FP2 it had grown into a full on smartphone OS (no matter the idiotic opinions over at The Verge). I read somewhere that there were serious issues getting it running on multicore SoCs though. App wise, by then Nokia had shifted to qt, which made developing apps for any of their OSes (and even pretty much any OS but iOS) really quite easy. Even BBOS 10 used qt at lot.
Oh what could have been. iOS, Android, Windows Mobile, Maemo/Meego or Symbian, and BBOS. Maybe chuck in WebOS too. And with development environments like qt, developing apps for them all needn't have been hard either. But instead we got a duopoly due to corporate greed.
Anyway, what were we supposed to be discussing in this thread again?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked