Elon Musk Officially Purchases Twitter, Takes Company Private

[24K PureCool]

2 minutes ago, The Lock said:

But are these social groups a new thing? All we have to look at is the groups on facebook of anti-maskers/anti-vaxxers locally to see this already happening without these changes.

 

Perhaps another point I could make is how it might actually be easier to fight this disinformation. You can't fight what you can't see afterall, so having these things "more public" might actually dissolve the echo chambers over time if enough people get forced to see the logic against what they're reading

I think you are dealing with absolute in your analysis while I am dealing with ease of access. 

 

Yes their have always been social groups whither it be a neighborhood book club or something like the free masons but typically those are pretty mainstream while it was way harder to form cliques based on more radical thoughts pre social media.

 

People generally tend to hide their more controversial thoughts in face to face interactions so say even if a group of people are all fascist in a Cafe together, they won't know about it and form some sort of radical group. 

 

With social media however, human think there is some sort of anonminaity and are less hesitant to shout out their darkest thoughts. As hundred of millions have access to social media, it is way more likely for those thought to reach other with similar ideals thus connecting them together and co-ordinate with each other. In addition, social media algorithm tend to recommend like thinking group to each other thus also aid in the creation of echo chambers, which I guess counter your point there.

 

Now to give Musk credit, he may try to eliminate those bias algorithms which could be better to infiltrate and break up echo chambers and social bubbles but also goes the other way with disinformation campaigns infiltrating and try to split more well intentioned cliques should Elon follow through with his free speech absolutism. 

[nuckin_futz]

11 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I don't disagree with what you're saying. I do however question what the implications of this means. Given the difference of opinions on this thread alone, I doubt anyone truly knows.

No idea I can't get inside his head. Not sure I even want to as I suspect it looks something like this...

 

8 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

 

With social media however, human think there is some sort of anonminaity and are less hesitant to shout out their darkest thoughts. As hundred of millions have access to social media, it is way more likely for those thought to reach other with similar ideals thus connecting them together and co-ordinate with each other. In addition, social media algorithm tend to recommend like thinking group to each other thus also aid in the creation of echo chambers, which I guess counter your point there.

 

Now to give Musk credit, he may try to eliminate those bias algorithms which could be better to infiltrate and break up echo chambers and social bubbles but also goes the other way with disinformation campaigns infiltrating and try to split more well intentioned cliques should Elon follow through with his free speech absolutism. 

There is anonymity especially when someone can post messages as crazyguy69@sexmachine.

 

Make people post under a verified name and 99% of the nonsense will go away. Of course so will 90% of the user base and the entire business model.

Edited April 26, 2022 by nuckin_futz

[The Lock]

3 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

I think you are dealing with absolute in your analysis while I am dealing with ease of access. 

 

Yes their have always been social groups whither it be a neighborhood book club or something like the free masons but typically those are pretty mainstream while it was way harder to form cliques based on more radical thoughts pre social media.

 

People generally tend to hide their more controversial thoughts in face to face interactions so say even if a group of people are all fascist in a Cafe together, they won't know about it and form some sort of radical group. 

 

With social media however, human think there is some sort of anonminaity and are less hesitant to shout out their darkest thoughts. As hundred of millions have access to social media, it is way more likely for those thought to reach other with similar ideals thus connecting them together and co-ordinate with each other. In addition, social media algorithm tend to recommend like thinking group to each other thus also aid in the creation of echo chambers, which I guess counter your point there.

 

Now to give Musk credit, he may try to eliminate those bias algorithms which could be better to infiltrate and break up echo chambers and social bubbles but also goes the other way with disinformation campaigns infiltrating and try to split more well intentioned cliques should Elon follow through with his free speech absolutism. 

You're not wrong in the anonymity having a factor in these groups; however, I'm more talking about how this has already taken shape online and how having it more public could be a way to combat it. This is already a problem and having them more hidden typically allows them to discuss between themselves without the "influence of outsiders". Basically, what you're saying already happens and what we're already doing about it clearly isn't working. Perhaps this is going to be a problem for as long as the internet exists, but I don't see the harm in trying new methods in tackling it either.

 

Also, while these social media algorithms are going to help people find like-minded people, it will also help the opposition out in finding them as well, so it's really more of a double-edged sword with this.

[Bure_Pavel]

26 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Trust me on this one he isn't buying it to improve the business model and make money. He's buying it to sate his ego and exert his control.

Why cant it be both, everything the guys touches turned to gold. It shouldn't be any harder than flying to Mars or solving global warming.  

[24K PureCool]

25 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I don't disagree with what you're saying. I do however question what the implications of this means. Given the difference of opinions on this thread alone, I doubt anyone truly knows.

I guess how one think of this right now is entirely dependent on how much one like or trust Elon.

 

His fan boys and girls will hail him as the great savior of Twitter while those that think he is a supervillain will say it will destroy the world. (Hyperbolic here)

 

Both sides are equally credible cause Musk is all over the place. 

 

Chances are he will start off with more or less an everything goes approach before learning that there is a reason social media platforms moderate its content and goes back to what Twitter is doing now. 

[24K PureCool]

14 minutes ago, The Lock said:

You're not wrong in the anonymity having a factor in these groups; however, I'm more talking about how this has already taken shape online and how having it more public could be a way to combat it. This is already a problem and having them more hidden typically allows them to discuss between themselves without the "influence of outsiders". Basically, what you're saying already happens and what we're already doing about it clearly isn't working. Perhaps this is going to be a problem for as long as the internet exists, but I don't see the harm in trying new methods in tackling it either.

 

Also, while these social media algorithms are going to help people find like-minded people, it will also help the opposition out in finding them as well, so it's really more of a double-edged sword with this.

Yes these issue are occurring and current Twitter leadership is trying to combat that, Elon from what we can infer plans to significantly scale down that effort hence the worry. 

 

Also, to use the algorithm to infiltrate problematic group, you have to actively try to setup a account specially manipulate the algorithm to group you into the echo chamber. It is not something an average Joe with good intentuons will do in their spare time. 

[The Lock]

51 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Yes these issue are occurring and current Twitter leadership is trying to combat that, Elon from what we can infer plans to significantly scale down that effort hence the worry. 

 

Also, to use the algorithm to infiltrate problematic group, you have to actively try to setup a account specially manipulate the algorithm to group you into the echo chamber. It is not something an average Joe with good intentuons will do in their spare time. 

Let's look at what our current situation is right now. Let's say Bob is a radical and he wants to form a radical group. His main option at the moment is likely Facebook. With such groups, you are able to control who is in the group and who isn't in the group. You are able to effectively control your echo chamber. You are able to keep it closed without any outside influence. Now, obviously facebook has their policies and certain radical groups are often eradicated, but clearly not all. Bob is effectively "in control".

 

Now let's say that Bob worships Musk and decides to move his platform to twitter after hearing his news. Let's also say that, for argument sake, no more moderation happens (which won't be the case realistically). Can Bob still control who sees the content and who doesn't? Not really. That's not what twitter is about and I don't think there are closed groups within twitter anyway (correct me if I'm wrong). Therefore, by moving to twitter, that closed echo chamber is no longer closed.

 

Now, onto your comment about the algorithm. What you are saying could easily apply to a closed facebook group. For that part I will agree. However, I don't think what you're saying applies to twitter. Everything on twitter becomes public. All it would take is key words and understanding what key words to use to find these groups. It doesn't even matter if they are within the "search terms" or not. If someone says something on twitter, you can google it. There is no "infiltration" at that point. Anyone can do it. This is only even more enhanced as well by the use of retweeting.

 

Perhaps the only thing in favour of this "infiltration" argument I think would be the fact that you can't use an individual web crawler on twitter as that's against the terms and conditions. (I know this mostly because I do web crawling but that's another story lol)

Edited April 26, 2022 by The Lock

[24K PureCool]

51 minutes ago, The Lock said:

Let's look at what our current situation is right now. Let's say Bob is a radical and he wants to form a radical group. His main option at the moment is likely Facebook. With such groups, you are able to control who is in the group and who isn't in the group. You are able to effectively control your echo chamber. You are able to keep it closed without any outside influence. Now, obviously facebook has their policies and certain radical groups are often eradicated, but clearly not all. Bob is effectively "in control".

 

Now let's say that Bob worships Musk and decides to move his platform to twitter after hearing his news. Let's also say that, for argument sake, no more moderation happens (which won't be the case realistically). Can Bob still control who sees the content and who doesn't? Not really. That's not what twitter is about and I don't think there are closed groups within twitter anyway (correct me if I'm wrong). Therefore, by moving to twitter, that closed echo chamber is no longer closed.

 

Now, onto your comment about the algorithm. What you are saying could easily apply to a closed facebook group. For that part I will agree. However, I don't think what you're saying applies to twitter. Everything on twitter becomes public. All it would take is key words and understanding what key words to use to find these groups. It doesn't even matter if they are within the "search terms" or not. If someone says something on twitter, you can google it. There is no "infiltration" at that point. Anyone can do it. This is only even more enhanced as well by the use of retweeting.

 

Perhaps the only thing in favour of this "infiltration" argument I think would be the fact that you can't use an individual web crawler on twitter as that's against the terms and conditions. (I know this mostly because I do web crawling but that's another story lol)

Again I am dealing with ease of access not absolutes.

 

What you are arguing with searching for hashtags still takes effort.

 

What I am saying with algorithm is what will pop up on someone's feed without the user doing anything other than scrolling down. 

 

Most users do not go search for things. They consume what pops up hence the echo chamber. This have 100% to do with ease of access not if one can do it or not. 

[The Lock]

9 minutes ago, 24K PureCool said:

Again I am dealing with ease of access not absolutes.

 

What you are arguing with searching for hashtags still takes effort.

 

What I am saying with algorithm is what will pop up on someone's feed without the user doing anything other than scrolling down. 

 

Most users do not go search for things. They consume what pops up hence the echo chamber. This have 100% to do with ease of access not if one can do it or not. 

Let me ask you this then. What, in your mind, separates ease of access from "absolutes"? Where are you going with this? I can't say I really understand your argument here without you explaining further. I don't really understand where I'm "talking in absolutes".

 

As far as what shows up on feeds, what's so different about how things happen now? If you google something, you get a lot of random links that often have nothing to do with what you wanted. This is especially the case if you're bad at searching for something. If you scroll through facebook, the same things happen, especially if it's someone you know. I literally had to stop reading facebook because I kept seeing people I liked showing their hatred towards things like masks and mandates. This stuff literally already happens.

 

What I'm saying also has to do with ease of access. Twitter allows you to easily contradict someone else through a reply. Everything you've said, also applies to what I'm saying. You can happenstance on a tweet you don't like and comment the opposite. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by The Lock

[Canuck You]

Congrats Elon! Screw censorship.

 

#Progress

[nuckin_futz]

So TWTR closed today at $49.68. Take over price is $52.40. A difference of $2.72/share.

 

There is a breakup fee either party can invoke of $1 billion.

 

If anyone is totally convinced that this deal will close in October there is a free $2.72/share kicking around.

 

That would be a 5.5% gain for just sitting around waiting (and a bit of hoping nothing bad happens).

[nuckin_futz]

57 minutes ago, Canuck You said:

Congrats Elon! Screw censorship.

 

#Progress

So I can (for example) insinuate you're a pedophile and send a mob after you, and that's a good thing?

 

That's not progress.

[The Lock]

3 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

So TWTR closed today at $49.68. Take over price is $52.40. A difference of $2.72/share.

 

There is a breakup fee either party can invoke of $1 billion.

 

If anyone is totally convinced that this deal will close in October there is a free $2.72/share kicking around.

 

That would be a 5.5% gain for just sitting around waiting (and a bit of hoping nothing bad happens).

That's certainly a roll of the dice. lol

 

Perhaps I should be clear here and state I'm really on the fence with what happens. I didn't have a strong opinion about twitter itself to begin with or Musk for that matter. I'm just going by what I'm observing at this point and trying to logically sort out possible outcomes.

[nuckin_futz]

3 minutes ago, The Lock said:

That's certainly a roll of the dice. lol

 

Perhaps I should be clear here and state I'm really on the fence with what happens. I didn't have a strong opinion about twitter itself to begin with or Musk for that matter. I'm just going by what I'm observing at this point and trying to logically sort out possible outcomes.

It's very rare that these deals fall apart. Musk wants it badly and the Twitter board unanimously agreed to the sale. So unless market conditions get really topsy turvy I don't see the deal falling apart. A $billion to walk away isn't chump change.

 

The closer the calendar gets to October the smaller the spread will get.

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

It's very rare that these deals fall apart. Musk wants it badly and the Twitter board unanimously agreed to the sale. So unless market conditions get really topsy turvy I don't see the deal falling apart. A $billion to walk away isn't chump change.

 

The closer the calendar gets to October the smaller the spread will get.

True. Perhaps it's more the short-term effects of the stock that would involve "rolling the dice". There certainly is going to be a number of opinions on this and I could see the stock initially being somewhat volatile. Long term though it would probably be fine.

[nuckin_futz]

2 minutes ago, The Lock said:

True. Perhaps it's more the short-term effects of the stock that would involve "rolling the dice". There certainly is going to be a number of opinions on this and I could see the stock initially being somewhat volatile. Long term though it would probably be fine.

If you're convinced in October it will be $52.4 then who cares where it goes between now and then?

 

The only thing I could see happening is a competing bid at a higher price. Perhaps from Google or maybe even Bezos. Then Musk would probably top that offer. So in that scenario you'd make more than the $2.72/share.

[The Lock]

1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

If you're convinced in October it will be $52.4 then who cares where it goes between now and then?

 

The only thing I could see happening is a competing bid at a higher price. Perhaps from Google or maybe even Bezos. Then Musk would probably top that offer. So in that scenario you'd make more than the $2.72/share.

I guess it depends on if you're a day trader or not. lol

[nuckin_futz]

2 minutes ago, The Lock said:

I guess it depends on if you're a day trader or not. lol

Yeah if you're day trading you get what you get, good or bad. But April through October looks like 6 months to me.

[RUPERTKBD]

17 hours ago, nuckin_futz said:

So I can (for example) insinuate you're a pedophile and send a mob after you, and that's a good thing?

 

That's not progress.

Exactly. It's funny how the "free speech" and "no censorship" folks seem to think the clowns who get kicked off of social media platforms are hard done by....

 

They'd change their tune PDQ, if someone posted their contact info and said they "know for a fact" that they like to have sex with farm animals.....

Edited April 27, 2022 by RUPERTKBD

[bishopshodan]

 It is very weird to me that some people think that the richest person in world buying one of the most influential platforms and taking it private is a good thing.