Twitter is now attention roulette and ultimately meaningless
playpermissionless.substack.comMy feed looks like this:
1) "Facebook style" post are proliferating, that is memes from last year and images/videos from 5 years ago
2) Too many "cookie cutter" posts, that is variation of formats like "100 million people are using AI but %99 are using it wrong"
3) Propaganda accounts pushing narratives, that is something like "before everything was great, now everything is bad. what changed?", then with flood of replies indicating that what changed is loss of Christian values and too many immigrants.
4) Obvious lunatics, that is chemtrail enthusiasts who pose as Phd in this Fellow in that.
5) Tesla FSD just saved lives, the real danger are the human drivers
6) Get rich fast schemes and courses that are supposed to give you passive income to retire early.
7) MAGA types and anti-MAGA types fighting
8) TikTok videos
9) Stuff from people I follow
10) scam ads
The general content on Twitter has become really low quality rage content. Some good things that you can't find elsewhere still exists though and that is tweets from real people tweeting about current events as those events are unfolding.
Sometimes I think maybe Twitter should have been a non-profit that captures only the part about real people broadcasting about current events as they are unfolding.
Sounds joyful.
I switched to Mastodon some time ago. The first posts in my feed are currently:
A historic photo of 50s America
A question about parsing JSON in Rust
A historic fact about Scotland
A panoramic photo from a mountaintop
A selection from Francis Grose’s “Dictionary Of The Vulgar Tongue”
A picture of a hiking trail sign
A guide on how to change your shell in Linux
etc.
It's not the same as Twitter, but on the other hand, it's not the same as Twitter.
> 2) Too many "cookie cutter" posts, that is variation of formats like "100 million people are using AI but %99 are using it wrong"
> 5) Tesla FSD just saved lives, the real danger are the human drivers
> 6) Get rich fast schemes and courses that are supposed to give you passive income to retire early.
Hopefully this helps others, because I see these complaints often about Twitter (and about Reddit too, shocking number of tech-minded people just read the front page and get mad at it!).
These types of posts fall under what I call the "self-improvement bait" umbrella, including the Tesla accounts here, since they are so weird and monomaniacal about Tesla and $TSLA and Elon.
Several months ago I simply started blocking anyone who posts using their strange marketing cadence, because they're all the same really. They are so easy to spot within 4 or 5 words.
I cannot express just how much my feed improved after doing this. Of course, new accounts trying to bandwagon on this trend do pop up, but again, just block them and move on.
I wish there was a Twitter currated and moderated like /r/historians is on reddit. The answers you are getting are not always correct and sometimes you dont' get one at all (either because no expert can answer or the question is unsanswerable in the first place) but they are always reasoned, calm and thought out.
(And yes I realize the irony posting this on a social media webpage).
Ultimately most people and their takes are really really boring and "freedom of speech absolutism" (as Twitter nowadays sees itself) leads to interesting, well researched and novel thoughts being drowned out by the mass garbage stuff.
I really don't understand why some people (like the current Twitter CEO) seem to crave that kind of attention.
I'd rather miss a few pearls than being bombared with manure all day.
Funny how I get the same thing in German including the German Fascists and Propagandists.
I wonder if it's because they're still all there while others left or if there is some kind of algorithmic intention behind it.
My theory: Both arguments are fed by state-level actors using "verified" accounts, because internal discord in western countries is to their advantage.
Really bad one that’s probably a subset of one of yours but really grates on me specifically are ones in the style of: “What the the top X products/things/whatever that are overrated/underrated/lies/scams?” Which of course are just super generic questions that get people to engage with the post and produce exactly zero new information.
It's not like there is a huge Following tab that shows only posts by people you follow.
There's no reason why someone like Richard Hanania should be in my "For You". It is as far away from anything I interact or follow that the only reason why it could be there for me is if it was being pushed intentionally for whatever stupid reasons.
The change is quite recent, my feed suddenly became utter crap overnight.
Yup, 9- is the reason (and only one) why I still use Twitter. The rest of the content is absolute garbage, as illustrated in the "for you" tab which seems to be a mix of all your other points.
There is btw a browser extension called "control pannel for twitter" available for FF and Chrome which let you hide the "for you" tab (among other options). Very useful on desktop. No such option for mobile though.
For mobile, “Control Panel for Twitter” has a paid safari extension for iOS or a free user script version for any browser that supports a user script manager. Unfortunately solutions like these only work on the web app, rather than the native app.
Lol. Sounds like YouTube.
"The changes to the algorithm turned the platform into a form of attention roulette."
Twitters artificial limit of 140 character made the plattform always a shallow clickbait rage addiction thing to me. I never ever enjoyed reading anything there, before or after Musk aquired it. Anything good I did find, always would have been nicer to read as an ordinary blog post. But blog posts don't get as much attention as clickbait tweets, so people stay on twitter, as long as there is audience.
Meh, i've read and continue to read many great twitter-threads of linked posts. Sure 10 years ago that might have been a blogg post.
Really the content you get on twitter is 110% dependent on those you follow (on the for-me tab at least), I follow about 90-100 people and you really notice when you follow someone who reposts crap how quickly your feed deteriorates. Its a sensitive beast but can be quite good actually.
But don't you enjoy one coherent post more, than a fragmented series of short posts, all mixed with distracting side elements for enhanced engagement?
So I get, that people still use twitter to get interesting content, but yeah, I do not get, how one can really like the experience.
Depends on the topic to be honest and the quality of the post. I consume more varying topics now than i did during the blog-era.
But sure - a well crafted blogpost is wonderful and I miss that. But there was a lot of crap back then aswell.
I don't get why people keep using the default recommendations? The whole point of twitter was that you manually pick who to follow and see just that. And you still can do that, use the Following tab and it'll work just the same as the day 1. For extra points you can create lists so that you can group people and fine-tune your timeline...
Social platforms are entirely driven by 1 primary, habit-forming action — the slot machine scroll.
They call it doom scrolling for a reason. The other parts of the UI might as well not exist.
Even on Reddit and HN, there’s an absolutely devastating drop off between homepage visitors and subreddit visitors (or /ask /show visitors). You would be amazed how many Reddit users have never left the home tab.
I don't know who's right here, but the article did address it
> One of the main ways I was using Twitter is to find people doing interesting things and then follow them to see what they're up to. This no longer works since you no longer see tweets from the people you follow unless they go viral.
I don't want to sound arrogant, but they really need to rtfm.
There's a tab Following in the top and it shows people that you follow and their activity. I use it daily and haven't noticed anything of what they describe.
Now, there are other problems obviously: one is how aggressively Twitter was pushing their "recommendations", so for a while the app used to switch back to recommendations without asking for permission, which was really a douchebag move, but you just switch it back to Following tab and timeline again works fine. I haven't noticed this lately, so it could have also been just a bug they've fixed. Another issue is that they mix notifications from "friends of friends" (in Facebook lingo), which also can suck as sometimes ppl you follow happen to follow idiots (¯\_(ツ)_/¯), but you can just block annoying people and after some time trash filters out.
So it's far from perfect, but on the other hand it's not that big drama as some ppl try to present it, honestly. At least for my needs and my circle of online friends and interests...
Can't edit the above post anymore, so let me write it here: After writing all this in the post above I've went to check the twitter (as I usually do) and it's set back to For you recommendations... so yeah, now I get why ppl say it's broken... though it's not really broken, it's just evil and really annoying...
The chronological order is quite subobtimal. You still want to discover new content/ideas/conversation. It's easy to miss out on a lot of what your followers have been tweeting if you don't check it 24/7. On the other hand, when you sit for an hour to check twitter, the following tab will dry-out immediately and you can't discover anything new unless you go to the For You tab which is basically a mix of stuff.
Indeed if you're active, and like stuff, the algo improves and shows you lots of relevant content. But mostly from the prominent accounts and only viral ones. So the point of the post stands.
My experience is different, perhaps because I follow people from both Europe and US (and some in Australia and Asia), so around the clock I always have 10-20 new tweets to go through, which is just as much of social noise that I have time for anyway... but it's still the most reliable source of information for my home country daily politics (because local media is censored heavily) and also gives me a good bird-view on what's going on with web-dev and AI industries (my primary professional interest). I have accounts on all alternative platforms, but none is giving me even nearly that good signal/noise ratio...
> On the other hand, when you sit for an hour to check twitter, the following tab will dry-out immediately
That sounds great to me!
Same with YT. Use https://www.youtube.com/feed/subscriptions exclusively
I have put some thought into this and my stack includes an assortment of Chrome extensions to observe the behavior I like.
- Hide Youtube Shorts
- Hide Youtube Watched
- uBlock Filter to remove Upcoming videos from the subscription page
- Unhook with most options turned on
I do the same for Twitter with the Just Arrived extension tweaked from gh.
> Just Arrived extension tweaked
This one? https://github.com/tecoholic/Just-Arrived
What about mobile? I find myself scrolling on my phone a lot and I use a modded app because Android, thankfully. I feel like the best solution is to just delete the app, ultimately.
Yes, this one. No solution for mobile.
> Hide Youtube Shorts
Interestingly, this is a non-hidden feature of YouTube itself; you can just close the shorts section of the page. Except that the setting automatically expires after some period of time, maybe ~1 month.
> Hide Youtube Watched
This doesn't seem to make a lot of sense; would you hide "heard" songs on Spotify?
> This doesn't seem to make a lot of sense; would you hide "heard" songs on Spotify?
The content I consume it's better one off (podcasts, informational videos etc.). If I need to keep anything on them, I store them elsewhere.
If you have no watch history, they don’t even show you recommended videos in the home page anymore. I see that as generally positive
This. Disabled history with a subscription makes YouTube a good boy.
That's just how people are, they put in the least amount of effort they can, and tend not to be curious or want to bother with change. Even on Hacker News people stumble across features hidden in plain sight all the time because they just never bothered to alter their initial routine.
"I don't get why people keep using the default recommendations? Just go against everything the site wants you to do and that's it!"
It is just one tap, right on the top, not that hard and that the algorithm starts showing you stuff by default before new people follow enough is not that evil is it ?
I didn't say it's evil, but the site is trying to bias you into "engagement". Yes, it's one tap, one tap every time I load the site, plus the four seconds it takes for the new view to load.
Pass.
this is news? social media and promotion algorithms have always been attention roulette for ad dollars, and nothing in that ecosystem has a knowledge of "meaning", just engagement through statistics.
Pre-Elon algorithmic timeline was certainly not perfect but it mostly did the job, and I'd discover accounts sharing content relevant to my interests, the need to mute or block was fairly minimal.
Note that the post is about 'creating content'. Of course what they want is 'engagement'.
If you actually have something to say about a subject you care about, the term is not 'creating content'.
not from your perspective. but from the viewpoint of the platform, it is just more content
> from the viewpoint of the platform
The post wasn’t written by a (person who works for a) platform, it was written by a user of it.
There is a way to make twitter usable. Mass blocking.
And I do like the "For you" feed. I do want to read random people's tweets, I keep finding solid reading material that way. But that means I have to block a significant portion of all of twitter. I'd say after about 50k to 100k accounts blocked it gets better. Less for other languages.
There are browser plug-ins that block all accounts that follow a given account. Those are great. So, whenever I find a MAGA guy with Russian grammar structure, an NFT scammer, a bible quote proselytizer, or a Tesla bag holder, I just block everybody following that account.
It takes about a day or two of doing, but then it works great. Best done when sick, works well with headaches and a fever. But now my twitter experience is about as good as it was 2017.
> This no longer works since you no longer see tweets from the people you follow unless they go viral.
I agree that this makes the site not worth using as is. So I use a browser extension that removes almost everything except tweets from people I follow, including ads. With that in place I find it to be a service with a high signal to noise ratio.
This is the reason I really like Mastodon. No algorithm, just timesorted posts by who you follow.
This limits how many people you can follow. You can't follow people who occasionally post a banger but also post a lot of stuff you don't care about.
I don't think algorithms are the issue but the intent of the algorithm is where it falls apart for most social media. It's not to cater to what you want to see but to what will keep you watching.
Mastodon missing a feature to somewhat curate your timeline automatically is what stops it from wide adoption.
Apparently what stops it from wide adoption is people commenting on Mastodon while not knowing it.
If you want to curate your timeline you use lists; one I use is "those accounts who rarely post and I want to see it all"
> This limits how many people you can follow.
Which is valid to be looked at as a feature rather than a deficiency.
> Mastodon missing a feature to somewhat curate your timeline automatically is what stops it from wide adoption.
Citation needed. There’s always something that someone points out as “the reason that stops Mastodon from wide adoption”, yet its usage continues to rise slow and steady. Maybe what’s wrong is not the slow adoption of Mastodon, but the rapid adoption of other social networks which have billions of dollars behind them with perverse incentives to consume your life so you consume advertised products.
> You can't follow people who occasionally post a banger but also post a lot of stuff you don't care about.
Well, you can. It depends how much you care about the part of their content that you like.
Mostly you'd follow someone else who does the job of filtering for you, and you'd hear about the great stuff slightly slower than people who followed that guy directly. You might not see that banger until the following day.
Follow hashtags. I don't follow anyone on Mastodon. That way I only see posts that are relevant to my interests.
If it is "a banger", there is reasonnable change it goes to you through shared posts.
Also there is a page with Trending Posts, Trending Hashtags, Trending News and Trending Accounts.
That's exactly what Twitter does if you use the "Following" tab instead of the other one.
Yea, the article seems to not understand that there's a tab to make it to what he wants. Weird.
I love that it’s easier to close as well! If I see stuff I’ve already seen it gives a natural stopping point.
It’s also great for engagement from the right audience. Posts on Twitter now get little to no response, whereas the same on Mastodon results in more followers and more actively engaged humans (also way nicer). Interestingly TikTok is really good for this, but you do have to bend the content to fit a shorter attention span.
I wanted to love Mastodon.
While slightly better, both seem to me like an utter waste of time to me.
There is just an unsolvable, signal to noise problem when it comes to a personal optimal feed for me.
The content I will like best will not be popular. If that is true then it is hopeless for me because of the scaling properties of the assumptions of the system and incentives for users of the system.
I am better off just talking to chatGPT4o and it isn't even close.
The trick to Mastodon is to follow hashtags instead of people. I have a couple of people I follow but I mostly follow hashtags relevant to my interests. The signal-to-noise ratio is very high. This also means it is critical to include hashtags when you post or comment to attract attention.
> The content I will like best will not be popular. If that is true then it is hopeless for me because of the scaling properties of the assumptions of the system and incentives for users of the system.
I don't understand. The content you want is accessiblto you and anyone who wants it, where is the scaling problem ?
> just timesorted posts by who you follow
The same as Twitter, following tab is literally this.
So I have never really used twitter much and I don't think I even signed up for it ever. But I want to double check something -- is it the case now, as this post suggests, that if you follow somebody, you do not see their posts? Isn't that the main purpose for the follow function?
Why would you do that? Why would you have a follow function and break it? And what else do you show people? I mean if your user follows someone, then it is what they want to see, why wouldn't you show them what they want to see?
The basic premise with algorithmic feeds is that users are lazy and don't do a lot of active discovery, so their follow lists tend to be pretty small. The algorithm can show them a mix of content where some of it is sourced from their existing follow/like graph (e.g. followed by someone you follow) and therefore likely to be interesting, and some is pushed on other less user-centric grounds. (E.g. in Twitter's case: "The CEO wants to be popular, so everyone sees his posts.")
Ideally the user is happy to discover new content that both complements their existing interests and occasionally introduces them to something new and exciting, while the company is happy to have an algorithmic lever that helps with ad placement. This theoretical win-win ideal may not get realized very often in practice...
Ok but that does not explain why you would actively remove content from their follow graphs. Sure, perhaps you can use the follow graphs to see what other stuff the user might be interested in and serve that, but why actively prevent the user from seeing posts that he has explicitly said he wants to see?
Presumably because feed real estate is so scarce and there are commercial motivations to show something else, so they start filtering out followed posts on the pretense of improving the quality of the feed. And that becomes a slippery slope.
"Ok, this user follows N. But N's latest post is already 15 hours old and it had poor engagement. Probably that means it's low quality and it's not worth including at all."
The first big algorithmic timeline I remember was Facebook, and it came at a time when the biggest complaint was "all I ever see on my feed is what people had for lunch". The idea was so you'll see the wedding pictures you care about but not the lunch photos you don't.
"why you would actively remove content from their follow graphs"
It makes sense, if you think you know better, what the user wants to see. Or, if you somehow make more money by doing so.
In either case, personally I like to decide, what I see myself, but I might actually be a minority (soon). Many people are apparently fine with intransparent algorithms making the decisions for them.
> "The CEO wants to be popular, so everyone sees his posts."
This is so insane to me. Some weeks ago I had to create a twitter account because I wanted to contact a developer for an app I'm using and the only contact information he had was his twitter account. I created a dumb account with my Google account and I was surprised that the first tweet I see is from Elon Musk. How small your ego has to be to request being featured first for every new account that is created? I remember I saw his face in the account creation process and I thought to myself "I would never follow this idiot" and still this guy is the first thing I see.
I wont be opening that cesspool anytime soon.
There are some problems with just showing people the people they follow in chronological order. It limits the amount of accounts you can follow, it buries accounts that post on times you don't reach by scrolling, your timeline can get spammed full by account you like but also post or retoot/retweet.
Sadly providing an algorithm that provides this is not what makes money so with most solutions you're stuck with an algorithm that just tries to show you what will keep you from clicking away instead.
The stupid thing about this is that Twitter has a great measurement system for evaluating the tweets. They have likes, retweets and quote tweets. It would not be that hard to make some inferences based on those metrics mixed with some randomness that would create a nicely curated timeline for most. You could even allow users to up the randomness or give some more explicit preferences.
If you follow someone you're still more likely to see their posts. You just see other stuff too in the "For You". It's algorithmic, and at times annoying - but contrary to the article is still very valuable in my experience.
I would say twitter stays about 1.5 months ahead of every other site I know of on AI news in particular. I've usually had time to demo new tools for quite a while before hearing about them on HN or elsewhere.
There are two tabs on the Twitter ios app. The first is called “For You,” and the next “Following.”
The first appears to be randomised or from The Algorithm, but as I far as I can tell, it’s mostly random.
The second also seems randomised but from people you follow.
> The second also seems randomised but from people you follow.
That’s not true.
The following tab is only showing you who do you follow with posts in chronological order
I don’t see every post from everyone I follow even if they’ve just posted. So there’s some filter on that tab as well.
> My preferred solution would be if we could just go back to personal blogs, blogrolls, newsletters, and RSS feeds. It seems unlikely but maybe a new generation of wrappers around these decentralized protocols would work.
Be the change you want to see in the world they say. If you can and want to, bring back a personal blog and post there. Blogging and rss are definitely not dead.
The growth is slower, it’s hard to go viral but that’s a feature imo, not a bug.
You’ll get fewer connections but are going to be a lot more meaningful.
> Attention on Twitter no longer has any ripple effects beyond the platform
out of the internet, back into many many sub-nets all isolated and in many cases fighting each other
> Attention on Twitter no longer has any ripple effects beyond the platform
because you're now expected to pay for that, pay google, pay face book, the more of them you pay the higher your reach. money has reasserted itself as social control over the internet too; wanna be famous/go viral? pay up
This has a neat side effect though - people who pay for attention usually have nothing interesting to say, so it becomes a good filter of what to ignore.
Making the blue tick into a marker of "paid to be promoted, I have nothing to say" was another instantly backfiring decision.
Of all the stupid Twitter design decisions new management has made, that's the one that baffles me most, because _everyone knows that pay-for-attention doesn't work_ as a dynamic. Social media has known this doesn't work since more or less before social media existed, because _dating sites_ have been trying to make it work, with very limited success, for 25 years now.
I'm curious if Twitter publishing view count just exposed his account and that caused a personal crisis. He posts about four times a day and I'm yet to find one valuable tweet from the last month. It could all be ai generated reposts from /r/im14andthisisdeep such as:
> Most people are secretly convinced that they are a little bit smarter and a little bit crazier than the average person.
> reminder: the fastest way to get unstuck is to change your environment
> Don't write a book or live a life that can that can be easily summarized.
> Coaching is 99% about listening which is why virtually everyone sucks at it.
Maybe the algorithm isn't the issue in this case.
For some reason Attention is still not thought of as finite Human resource that needs to be allocated with care.
Its like there is no mechanism that measures waste of Attention at a high level. Not at the individual level.
High school cafeteria is the analogy that makes the most sense to me.
If you just follow a couple of bright AI luminaries and block everything else it's very useful and enjoyable.
Always has been.
It's also virtually a paid service unless you only interact with your inner circle.
Don't use the algorithm. Press the "following" tab.
The author is also looking to get readership, so the correct, but basically impossible, advice is:
Make sure that the vast majority of your potential readership are actively avoiding the default experience being heavily promoted by the platform.
One could also say that his complaint is that he used to be a bigger fish relative to the pond, but now that there are more users on the platform he is getting more competition.
So you are going back on your previous advice to him and now suggesting he'd find better things to read by letting the algorithm choose?
No. I don't see how you could say that.
I think there are two things:
1. he wants to see good things (use the "following" tab)
2. he wants to be seen (can't do much about that except be more rage-inducing)
He presumably considers his content "good things" and wants relevant people to see it, and at one point they did. Just as he found good content.
He thinks they're now being shown rage-inducing bullshit instead by the algorithm.
You seem to agree with this analysis from the point of view of a reader, but think from a writers point of view he's just being outcompeted by better content. That seems inconsistent.
So what is his move, to get good non rage bait content to an audience, except to leave twitter?
That's true. There is a problem with the platform even having an algorithm at all. Mastodon does not, so that's a good option.
Threads is much worse at least...
Twitter is still the only.place you can have user uploaded videos for events such as the border crisis, the ongoing wars.
Its easy to criticize the attention traps without seeing the benefits
I would say it has now been supplanted by TikTok.
French gov just banned TikTok a few days ago in Kanaky (called New Caledonia under french imperial colonialism) to try to limit communication between insurgents in its colony.
Lol "colony" there were literally 3 referendums and they said 3 times they wanted to stay feench but ok.
The kanaks are nothing more than racists against foreigners and a government that has been way over the top in respecting their indigenous customs and right to self determination
Please educate yourself before spouting russian propaganda.
It is not russian propaganda: https://www.un.org/dppa/decolonization/en/nsgt/new-caledonia
By the way your are contradicting yourself;
If as you say the issue are kanaks being racists against foreigners, that means the non kanak french people living there are indeed foreigners. You are only confirming they are colons.
I suggest you give a look at the "strip tease" TV program of 1998 (not so long ago) were you could see french colons treating their kanaks "employees" as slaves and insulting them just for being indigenous, then try repeating me again that the problem are kanaks being racists.
> If as you say the issue are kanaks being racists against foreigners, that means the non kanak french people living there are indeed foreigners. You are only confirming they are colons
So by your logic arab people in Europe are colons and should GTFO ? The reality is that migration happen and territory dont belong to a special skin color. Saying the opposite and hatin people who were born on the same territory just bc of their culture is just plain racism.
1998 was 26 years ago and people are assholes to each other at work even when they are from the same culture. Thats not an argument.
And once again the kanaks have their own institutions and are mostly autonomous. (And even better than that considering the money flowing from france). And the extremist actually burnt them several times.
Its not about colonisation. Its basic extremist / racist violence from a minority motivated but russian propaganda on tik tok like in niger and centra africa
> So by your logic arab people in Europe are colons and should GTFO ?
Which Arab people? Is there an arab government who has invaded, maintained a force presence, set up its own political institutions, decimated the population with diseases, exploited the indigenous population, and that is sending police forces from its mainland to a european country to maintain control in the last 2 centuries?
You are mixing up migration and colonization which are different things.
I think YOU are mixing up migration and colonization.
It's not colonization when you organize 3 referendums for self-determination, and indigenous cultures have their own senate. Non-indigenous people who were born there have as much right to be there than "indigenous" people, same as arabs born in Europe should not be kicked out Europe. The rest is pure racism.
Referendums organized after decimating the indigenous population, and importing french and pro-french people en masse for decades. Obviously if you make sure the indigenous people end up in the minority through colonization, your referendums will not translate to anything else.
This is like a company rejecting tons of co2 every year, planting 3 trees and greenwashing people into thinking they do everything against global warming.
This is totally about racism, but not in the direction you pretend it is.
I don't know, the number of people coming from an "European" descent never seem to have been superior to the number of kanak people: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9mographie_de_la_Nouvell...
I guess the french passport has some value for the indigenous. And again, not one referendum, three. I'm confused what more you could convince you.
"Colonisation" is an easy answer to everything but the reality is often more complicated. Not saying it's not a colony, it is, but that it doesn't mean a majority of 'colonised' see more benefit to it that inconvenients.
While being the major individual ethnic group, it is enough to make the kanaks a a minority against the population that migrated to the island while under France governance (and thus more likely to be at least for the status quo).
It is said that a majority of the kanaks are pro independence.
Let's be clear, I am pretty sure that the kanaks would lose a lot by being independent and not able to rely on french aid, and would probably lose even better if their natural resources attract others but ...
... I also think that since Napoleon III annexed it as an oversea territory of France Kanaks never had the chance to decide for themselves and have been prejudiced. Their lands taken over, being subject to abuse, not being given the same chances overall as caldos.
I believe this should still be their choice, even if it means a worse life for them afterwards.
Had the colons treated them better for a start, there would be less pro independence among the kanaks so it is really on France's side to make amend and on caldos to stop acting like victims when for the most part they are collectively the offenders (the important word is 'collectively' here).
by the way, the full text of the Nouméa Accord signed in 1998 after a previous insurection contain in its preamble the admission by the french state that New Caledonia/Kanaky is a colonized territory: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/jorf/id/JORFTEXT000000555817/
The french state admitted it, the United Nations recognized it. Only the current french government is not recognizing it because it is gradually morphing towards extreme right and facism.
You shouldn't be looking at the feed
Thats how all social media are. Welcome to the world I guess? you're about 15 years late.
Roulettes aren't useless though
Much like a roulette, in Twitter the house always wins.
Is it though? There's no sign it's remotely profitable.
Reddit is leaking with this one.
All tech announcements always happen on twitter first lol. If you're using bleeding edge software most devs post it on twitter first.
this commend is a left wing cope and doesn't belong in this comment section.
> I've personally gone back to reading books and blog posts, talking to people via email, working on a book project, and prioritizing in-person, local relationships.
I mean, this sounds great? Or maybe I misinterpret that this change in how we view twitter is positive rather than a negative. I believe that Twitter as a centralized sounding board was a net bad for Internet culture anyway.
"Now"?
Limiting outbound reach was, insanely, a deliberate decision by the new mismanagement.
Limiting outbound reach was a necessity when (a) the content itself becomes valuable for training AI and (b) you want to monetize the API.
"now"
It was always attention roulette and ultimately meaningless.
I like fact checking (Community Notes) on twitter. I am not that much exposed to western culture, and it is good for explaining latest fads and memes from west.
Like why someone refused to provide definition of something somewhere. It provided commentary for clawn universe.
Good timing... I'm building an alternative to Twitter and nearing our launch date. It's focused on devs and HN readers, even having an integration with HN.
That seems ill advised. The critique of modern twitter is overblown, as can be seen when going to Threads which is even more outrage fueled than even twitter.
Curious, what do you think can be done better? Maybe Twitter's whole approach is just not interesting anymore.
Commercial social network will always have this problem. It's impossible to avoid. User's interests are always pitted against advertiser and commercial interests.
The closest strategy we have to something that is long-term viable is:
- non-commercial, so developers focus on building a product for users, rather than advertisers
- decentralised, to provide an escape mechanism for product direction/moderation/etc going poorly
But even then, the only winning move is not to play
What's your motivation for building this when alternatives like Mastodon already exist?
Mine requires karma on other networks, like HN, before users can post. It reduces spam and fake accounts. However, u can still post anonymously then choose to reveal your username later anytime. Posts support Markdown. It also integrates with the tools I use, for example if you post a link to a blog and that blog happens to have been on HN too then it shows the HN icon with the HN post points and a link to the HN comments, automatically. If you post a link to a repo, it tags the post with the main language of that repo automatically so the post can be filtered easier. The feed is like Tweetdeck so users have control over what they see instead of an algorithm. Posts have structured data associated, like program language, so they can be searched/filtered easier. That way you decide what to see on your feed using metadata about the posts instead of an algorithm deciding for you. Infinite scroll isn't the goal, it becomes more useful like HN or Reddit.
There's much more, that's just a few features making it a social platform I enjoy using instead of a time waste like the infinite scroll algorithm based ones.
There are elements here which might be more useful to a broader audience in the form of a browser plugin. Is this something you've considered?
It's not about displaying these things, it's about parsing this data from the posts and making all posts filterable by this metadata. Display vs Discovery.
I want to reduce the noise in social network posts.
What is your proposal for adding (or capturing) value?
See my other comment here.
I feel it’s primarily a platform for Elon to cultivate bagholders for his various enterprises. The whole white supremacist cosplay just a method to filter to the most gullible audience looking for a strong leader.
Not sure how Cathy woods as the Queen of bagholders fits in there but there’s probably a connection.
I think that’s an overly optimistic view of it. While I don’t doubt that there’s a component of it, it also very much feeds into musk’s pathological need for attention and flattery: the marks angle could explain signal boosting the worst idiots (though I’m not convinced), it does not explain the cringy, juvenile, and usually off-mark meme attempts (or uncredited reposting, complete with flying off the handle when that’s remarked on).
>it does not explain the cringy, juvenile, and usually off-mark meme attempts (or uncredited reposting, complete with flying off the handle when that’s remarked on).
I think that's just him. I think he's just an immature manchild clinging to a sense of relevance and youth, and Twitter gave him the opportunity to show his ass in a way we just didn't see before. Almost everything he does on the platform gives off a strong "hello fellow kids" vibe.
A high pass filter eventually making any non mark leave ?
edit: Lol at the bag holder brigading