• Poggervania
    link
    fedilink
    592 years ago

    Honest-to-God question: is Elongated Muskrat intentionally screwing up Twitter so people can’t use it as a means to communicate? It sounds like a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory, but it’s the only logical thing I could think of at this point that explains this kind of stuff they’re pulling.

    • eighthourlunch
      link
      fedilink
      122 years ago

      I’ve been thinking exactly the same thing. Facebook, Twitter and Reddit. Each of them a complete shit show of disinformation and censorship. Blogs and personal web sites are pretty much dead. It’s getting harder and harder for anyone without buckets of money to stand on equal ground.

      • Uranium3006
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        Higher intrest rates are dynamiting an already sketchy busniess model. Once the era of the cirpo macrowebsite ends santiy will return to the web

    • Uranium3006
      link
      fedilink
      32 years ago

      No, he’s just incompetent. At his other companies he has handlers, at Twitter he doesn’t

    • pensa
      link
      fedilink
      82 years ago

      I think he knows it is a money pit that will never be profitable so is intentionally trying to kill it. It will never make him money only cost him money. He can’t just shut it down without seriously damaging what credibility he has left. Seriously, what are his options to stop this ‘money leak?’

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        92 years ago

        I think shuttering it would have saved more of his credibility than whatever the fuck this is he’s doing.

      • Dangdoggo
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        Yup. That has to be it honestly. I’ve mulled it over a lot and if Musk knows a single thing it’s finance. These moves have all been financial. Twitter, I suspect, was not profitable when he bought it. Rather than admit he did a mistake, he tank it. Tracks with his egomaniacal moves so far.

      • AggressivelyPassive
        link
        fedilink
        62 years ago

        Well, he could try to actually make it a usable platform and offer features people might be willing to pay for?

        Think about it, this blue checkmark subscription would have absolutely worked two years ago. You have to prove who you are, pay 10 bucks a month and then you’ll get the checkmark. A lot of people and institutions would have done that.

        Offering advanced, paid features for professionals might also help. Like user management or thread based user mappings, so that large accounts can get management by a team efficiently. Companies are definitely willing to pay substantial amounts of money for things like that.

        • pensa
          link
          fedilink
          72 years ago

          Could he though? I don’t think he is that smart. He has smart people running his other companies, but he is running the show at twitter. I think this is us seeing him fail when left on his own.

          • AggressivelyPassive
            link
            fedilink
            22 years ago

            That is not the question. He does have option, whether he is willing and able to realize them, is another question.

            Anyway, unless there is some serious change of policy (and realistically, ownership) happening over a Twitter, is will slowly die off.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          32 years ago

          The first thing he did at Twitter (as it was called back then) was to fire most developers. There’s no way he can introduce significant new features.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      402 years ago

      The man came in his first day carrying a sink. Now he’s sinking the company. Seems pretty straightforward.

    • TwilightVulpine
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      The only reason why I’m not so keen on the conspiracy, is that it doesn’t make sense to me that someone so wealthy would have to stake this destruction on his own reputation and take collateral losses on his other business if he was being machiavellian about it. He could tell his puppet CEO to take all those destructive measures and still maintain his tech genius image. It just seems more like a wild ego thing.

      But the people who funded his acquisition, this obvious hare-brained idea, maybe they were aiming for its destruction. They should have known that he was paying far more than the website was worth and that its income would never repay it.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      10
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      There are people that benefit from Twitter sinking (foreign governments, the US government, Twitter’s Saudi investor), so this has been my theory as well. I don’t think it’s a scenario where he’s aware though. I think he’s a useful idiot that can be manipulated.

      • lol3droflxp
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        So the Saudi investor invests in something that he wants to go broke?

        • TwilightVulpine
          link
          fedilink
          12 years ago

          For political aims, possibly. What is sure is that Twitter would never be able to repay the amount of debt the company got saddled with. It was barely making ends meet and now it has to pay an additional billion dollars a year in interest. Why would someone would put their money in such a bad deal?

        • Dr Cog
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          72 years ago

          You may underestimate the amount of money the Saudi government has

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          52 years ago

          That’s precisely why they invested in it. Sinking that ship means that one of the few remaining lifelines for working class communication around the world goes down in flames. When mass protests, school shootings, the Capitol invasion, and police violence occurred, which social media platform was almost always the place you’d end up reading about it from someone on the ground? Twitter. Think about how much easier the narrative can be controlled when Twitter is gone (or at least behind walls).

      • slaytswiftfan
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        foreign governments yes (Saudi) but how does the US government benefit…?

        • TehPers
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 years ago

          Because US politics might actually become less about who gets the most likes on social media. Look, I don’t know, but I can say after our previous presidency that the platform can’t be entirely beneficial to the US.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          If Twitter is at least hindered, it no longer works as a platform that gives people on-the-ground information about what’s going on in the country. When Twitter was at its peak, it was a tool for the working class to stay connected about protests and other events occurring in real time. That makes it more difficult for a government to control the narrative. Since the media can’t be trusted, Twitter would often become the place people go for information about shady shit a company is doing, outing cops trying to blend into protests, and other corrupt shit.

          Now that Twitter is becoming almost entirely paywalled and stripped of any real value, one of the last bastions of information for the working class is essentially gone. It’s no longer a hub that people use for such things. If you want to stay connected to a mesh network of people in a mass protest or something like that, Twitter is no longer a viable option to get information out immediately.

      • mayooooo
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        But he’s a very stupid and very malicious man, how do we know?

      • TwilightVulpine
        link
        fedilink
        22 years ago

        The capability of stupidity to explain things adequately when it comes to business and politics is very limited. In both those fields there are people constantly enacting malicious schemes and playing dumb.

      • RBG
        link
        fedilink
        132 years ago

        Honestly, that gives Elon just an easy out, making him look as if he is actually competent. Which he is not.

          • JohnEdwa
            link
            fedilink
            62 years ago

            In the way that no boss, manager or team leader works on anything, as they “just” order workers around. You really think his employees came up with something as dumb as the cybertruck on their own?

    • katy ✨
      link
      fedilink
      22 years ago

      I mean there’s communication between Musk and right wing figures before the sale about driving all the blue checks off and devaluating the company which we know about because the messages and communications were released in the court battle

    • samwise
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 years ago

      Destroying Twitter was always his goal. He really thought the “blue checks” were some cabal of liberal elites that Twitter facilitated so they could suppress the speech of others, and day one his whole purpose was to break that imagined control.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        32 years ago

        You give him far too much credit. Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.

        • interolivary
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Malice and stupidity aren’t exclusive, though. His actions can be stupid and malicious

    • HarkMahlberg
      link
      fedilink
      92 years ago

      Removing the Like button means you can’t be Ratio’d anymore, even compared to the comments of your detractors. That means vile, unpopular opinions will no longer be identifiable by the lack of likes. They get to stand on equal footing with popular opinions, with the average person none the wiser. Also, advertisements take one more step to being indistinguishable from organic posts.

      Homogenizing content on Twitter supports Musk’s two two main allies (or people he wishes were his ally): advertisers and fascists.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        4
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That’s not what’s happening, although that’s what the headline implies. What’s changing is that you need to click a post to show the options to retweet and like.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      13
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      I think initially, he just wanted to do his duty as a right-wing reactionary and use his influence to shame Twitter for deplatforming white supremacists, likely having heard that Truth Social was eying up a plot next to every other dead social network that pandered to fascists.

      But like every other figurehead of that crowd, below the bluster and bravado lies a very tiny dick and his preferred method of wearing shorts in the shower is spending millions of dollars in an effort to convince everyone he is the smartest man in the world.

      So pretentious screeds about “free speech absolutism” quickly turned into self-aggrandizing posts about how he could do it better and before he even got a chance to call someone a pedo, he’d accidentally made some comments about buying Twitter that he was legally obligated to follow through on.

      He tried to squirm out of it for a while, muttering about bots and whatnots, but it seems his lawyers informed him that yes, he had also bragged away his opportunity to back out and he was going to have to follow through.

      And so a couple of months later, he walked into a mostly empty office with 4 goals in mind.

      First, he needed to get far-right propaganda back on track. Too many people had started to see through the “we’re not neo-nazis we just have the opinions, goals and pundits”, plausible deniability schtick and the far-right funnel just wasn’t flowing how it used to before all the domestic terrorism.

      That kicked off a flurry of actions like unbanning mentally ill hip-hop artists, internationally embarrassing politicians and pseudo-intellectuals who’d spent decades striving to achieve mediocrity before they said something bigoted and were immediately placed on a pedestal.

      Second, he needed to self-soothe after doing something so stupid in front of so many people. $44 billion dollars down the drain! That’s not what the smartest man in the world would do! Especially not if money was the only thing that made him noteworthy in the first place.

      So he marched around unplugging things and pretending he knew what he was talking about and wasn’t just lifting key phrases from more intelligent people like a celebrity parrot.

      It was an unconvincing show for anyone in the industry who quickly realised he barely had a junior-level understanding of a single moving part, let alone the hundreds that keep a site like Twitter online.

      Third, he needed to claw back every penny he could, carefully balancing things like “gleefully firing all the heartbroken staff” with other important business like “indulging his teenage edgelord”.

      But each new idea is even more dogshit than the last. He bought a sinking ship and he’s trying to bail out the water with every piece of cutlery in the kitchen. It’s only a matter of time before the office supplies turn up on ebay.

      And fourth and, probably most importantly: “Are there any women in this place worth manipulating into prostitution? I need everybody back in the office tomorrow for a face to face”