- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Stop using the platform, if you insist on continuing to use it, you deserve the shit show you are getting. End of story.
The whole fiasco motivated me to create mastodon account. The crazy thing is that I never used Twitter.
Also I don’t get why people are complaining that mastodon is difficult. It seems to me is quite simple, or an I’m missing something?
They probably struggle to follow accounts from different instances, but it’s really not any harder than an email address.
It’s not necessarily so easy, there aren’t substitutes for a lot of the communities on twitter. Though I did just get into Bluesky the other day and am already spending more time in there than on twitter.
Mastodon has been working really well for me once I followed people. Connect well with Lemmy as well which I like. Hopefully more “official” accounts come in.
Been using Mastodon since 2018 and it’s brutally frustrating waiting for people to move to it.
It’s a really stable platform, and the various instance communities are pretty great.
But I have no fuckin clue why it’s not growing in adoption by Internet Normans.
Although, after the rate limiting issue, a whole shitload of people have signed up, so it’s promising.
Normies hate that Linuxy feel. I’m not hugely fond of the bare metal feel of federated social networks myself, and I’ve been doing the computer thing for… uh, when was the VIC-20 released again? Don’t underestimate the persuasive power of a friendly interface.
I dunno, between elk.zone or trunks.social, I don’t find the interface all that bad.
I’ve been in Mastodon for a few months and Bluesky for a few days, and Bluesky just blows it out of the water as a twitter replacement. Easier technically, a lot more of the people I follow are on there, people are easier to find, and most importantly the algorithm encourages rather than discourages engagement.
I find there’s no “discouraging”. Rather it’s just posts. The “engagement” aspect of Twitter and modern social media is imo the one thing that’s most important to leave behind. It’s not healthy.
Do you use the official app or is there a 3rd party app that’s better? I saw they updated the official one and was thinking about jumping in since I’m liking Lemmy.
Both the official and Ice Cubes work pretty well for me. I was in no way a power user for Twitter though. But after following the people I really wanted to the feed seemed fairly curated to me. Reminded me of the very early days of Twitter :)
I’ve been meaning to try out Bluesky, but I’ve been stuck on the waitlist since it opened up.
I don’t suppose you happen to have any invite codes you aren’t using? :D
If you get one pass one down please.
bsky-social-ijiny-vf7f5
bsky-social-u7g3b-jxasy
It’s not necessarily so easy, there aren’t substitutes for a lot of the communities on twitter. Though I did just get into Bluesky the other day and am already spending more time in there than on twitter.
Why not mastodon?
You can retweet/boost and comment on mastodon toots/tweets on kbin.
Because, especially for artists and creators seeking to publicize their work, it’s not widely adopted enough. They need their work shared to as many eyeballs as possible in hopes to sell. Mastodon is fine for personal use, but it doesn’t fit the business needs of these creators, I can’t blame any creator for staying on Twitter until their inevitable end, because the growing pains of alternatives will be difficult to weather.
It’s not widely adopted enough because artists and creators aren’t using it enough. Chicken or egg?
Yet, Mastodon had a big discoverability problem. No follow recommendations, no “highlights” tab, no search practically as follows don’t think to hashtag.
There might be many great artists and creators on Mastodon, but good luck finding them!
Why? Just use Mastadon. I’ve been using it for months it’s great.
Agreed, I am desperate to use something else, but the only place I can find a community is on Twitter. It’s not a techie community either, so the reason to move to something else has to be compelling and low barriers to entry. So far nothing else hits the mark.
Look, Twitter is going to die. When it dies you will have nothing in Twitter. This is the absolute truth that we know will happen. This “community” feeling is not going to be the same, not in Bluesky, not in Mastodon or Lemmy. When Twitter first started, people wanted the forums like feeling, we never got that feeling ever again. People who liked chatrooms, never got the chatroom feeling. Just as i will never feel those again, you too will not feel that Twitter feeling when Twitter dies.
deleted by creator
The extreme, even illogical nature of these interventions led to some speculation: Is Twitter’s so-called rate limit a technical mistake that’s being passed off as an executive decision? Or is it the opposite: a daring gambit of 13-dimensional chess, whereby Musk is trying to plunge the company into bankruptcy and restructuring? The situation has made conspiracy theorists out of onlookers who can’t help but wonder whether Musk’s plan has been to slowly and steadily destroy the platform all along.
Such theories are compelling, but they all share a flaw, in that they presuppose both a rational actor and a plan. You may not find either here.
That last line sums up what many have thought is actually going on at twitter, tesla, et al. for a while.
I saw a post a few months ago (which I’m too lazy to find) where a former SpaceX employee explained how the managers had to essentially manipulate Musk into not destroying the company. Essentially as the company grew, they formed a metaphorical cyst around his influence to limit his damage. That didn’t exist when he infested Twitter, and so the internet’s dumpster was ignited.
It really makes you wonder if all the “billionaires” aren’t exactly like this. Born into infinite privilege, surrounded by yes men and sycophants every minute of their lives. They become walking disasters who have to be managed and distracted constantly, kept far away from the actual business.
In the last few years, we’ve gotten an up close and personal look at two such figures - Musk and Trump. Musk is increasingly being revealed to be an idiot on at least a weekly basis. Trump is about to face his 3rd round of indictments out of who knows how many are coming? Putting a spotlight on these people has not gone well for them, to say the least.
I wonder what would happen if a camera crew had near-constant access to Jamie Dimon, Jeff Bezos, etc. I wonder if they have teams positioned around them to screen them out of important decisions as much as possible, because the privilege created by their disgusting levels of wealth and power has rotted their brains. I also wonder if you were to look closely enough at their dealings, they wouldn’t all be under indictment.
Humans naturally conflate wealth with either high intelligence or impeccable morality. In religious circles, this is often the source of prosperity gospel. In economic circles, this is often the source of fraud.
It really makes you wonder if all the “billionaires” aren’t exactly like this. Born into infinite privilege, surrounded by yes men and sycophants every minute of their lives. They become walking disasters who have to be managed and distracted constantly, kept far away from the actual business.
This instantly reminded me of Succession on HBO. It felt so over the top when it first came out but the more I learn about the ultra wealthy the more believable the show becomes.
Plus it seems to be based on the owners of Fox News.
Yes many of the billionaires are this. Same with politicians.
Plain Text:
Twitter may have just had its worst weekend ever, technically speaking. In response to a series of server emergencies, Elon Musk, the Twitter owner and self-professed free-speech “absolutist,” decided to limit how many tweets people can view, and how they can view them. This was not your average fail whale. It was the social-media equivalent of Costco implementing a 10-items-or-fewer rule, or a 24-hour diner closing at 7 p.m.—a baffling, antithetical business decision for a platform that depends on engaging users (and showing them ads) as much as possible. It costs $44 billion to buy yourself a digital town square. Breaking it, however, is free.
First, Twitter set a policy requiring that web users log in to view tweets—immediately limiting the potential audience for any given post to people who have Twitter—and later, Musk announced limits to how many tweets users can consume in a day, purportedly to counter “extreme levels of data scraping & system manipulation.” Although these measures will supposedly be reversed, as others have been during Musk’s tenure, they amount to a sledgehammering of a platform that’s been quietly wasting away for months: Twitter is now literally unusable if you don’t have an account, or if you do have an account and access it a lot. It is the clearest sign yet that Musk does not have his platform under control—that he cannot deliver a consistently functional experience for what was once one of the most vibrant and important social networks on the planet.
The extreme, even illogical nature of these interventions led to some speculation: Is Twitter’s so-called rate limit a technical mistake that’s being passed off as an executive decision? Or is it the opposite: a daring gambit of 13-dimensional chess, whereby Musk is trying to plunge the company into bankruptcy and restructuring? The situation has made conspiracy theorists out of onlookers who can’t help but wonder whether Musk’s plan has been to slowly and steadily destroy the platform all along.
Such theories are compelling, but they all share a flaw, in that they presuppose both a rational actor and a plan. You may not find either here. I’ve reported on Musk for the past five years, speaking with dozens of employees in the process to try to understand his rationales. The takeaway is clear: His motivations are frequently not what they seem, and chaos is a given. His money and power command attention and his actions have far-reaching consequences, but his behavior is rarely befitting of his station.
Of course, many of his acolytes—especially those in Silicon Valley—have tended to believe that he has everything in hand. “It’s remarkable how many people who’ve never run any kind of company think they know how to run a tech company better than someone who’s run Tesla and SpaceX,” the investor Paul Graham tweeted in November, after Musk took over the social network. “In both those companies, people die if the software doesn’t work right. Do you really think he’s not up to managing a social network?” But it has been clear since the moment we got a glimpse into his phone that Musk’s purchase of Twitter was defined by impulse: It appears to have been triggered in part by getting his feelings hurt by the company’s previous CEO. The decision was rash enough that he tried three times to back out of it.
Musk’s management style at the platform has appeared equally unstrategic. After saddling the company with a mountain of debt to complete his acquisition in October, he decided to tweet baseless conspiracy theories and alienate advertisers; days before this incident, the marketing lead in charge of managing Twitter’s brand partnerships had resigned. Musk quickly unbanned Twitter’s most egregious rule breakers; fired most of the employees, including those in charge of technical duties; and bungled the rollout of Twitter’s paid-verification system. Compared with a year earlier, Twitter’s U.S. advertising revenue for the five weeks beginning April 1 was down 59 percent.
Recently, Musk’s public-facing strategy to turn his company around has been to continue tweeting thinly veiled conspiracy theories and sex jokes, cozy up to far-right politicians, hire a CEO who was initially contractually forbidden to negotiate with some of Twitter’s brand partners, and float fighting Mark Zuckerberg in a cage match. To date, Musk’s leadership has degraded the reliability of Twitter’s service, filled the platform with bigots and spam, and alienated many of its power users. But this weekend’s disasters are different. The decision to limit people’s ability to consume content on the platform is the rapid unscheduled disassembly of the never-ending, real-time feed of information that makes Twitter Twitter.
His supporters are confused and, perhaps, starting to feel the cracks of cognitive dissonance. “Surely someone who can figure out how to build spaceships can figure out how to distinguish scrapers from legit users,” Graham—the same one who supported Musk in November—tweeted on Saturday. What reasonable answer could there be for an advertising company to drastically limit the time that potentially hundreds of millions of users can spend on its website? (Maybe this one: On Saturday, outside developers appeared to discover an unfixed bug in Twitter’s web app that was flooding the network’s own servers with self-requests, to the point that the platform couldn’t function—a problem likely compounded by Twitter’s skeleton crew of engineers. When I reached out for clarification, the company auto-responded with an email containing a poop emoji.)
All the money and trolling can’t hide what’s obvious to anyone who’s been paying attention to his Twitter tenure: Elon Musk is bad at this. His incompetence should unravel his image as a visionary, one whose ambitions extend as far as colonizing Mars. This reputation as a genius, more than his billions, is Musk’s real fortune; it masks the impetuousness he demonstrates so frequently on Twitter. But Musk has spent this currency recklessly. Who in their right mind would explore space with a man who can’t keep a website running?
Of course, many of his acolytes—especially those in Silicon Valley—have tended to believe that he has everything in hand.
One thing I’ve learned recently is how braindead much of the Silicon Valley venture capital community actually is. It wasn’t just that they all put their money in one bank that collapsed when they all pulled out. A major act of stupidity in itself. It is that they consistently have very little idea how business works in general. They seem to be living in an insulated bubble, and only survives because other people dump billions of dollars into the lap. No one checks up on them nor verify any of their startups are actually viable. It’s just more and more money dumped into their laps with most of it wasted.
Eventually, the cash spigot will end, and my bet is nearly all of them will forced out of the industry. Collectively, they have done nothing but waste hundreds of billions of other people’s money. Even their few “success” stories are things like companies that got bought out with few ever making money, or companies that could only survive if the venture capital market was crazy strong. So basically more flops if we’re honest. So the whole thing seems destined to fail in a spectacular way.
He’s got something in hand, all right.
investor Paul Graham tweeted in November, after Musk took over the social network. “In both those companies [Tesla and SpaceX], people die if the software doesn’t work right. Do you really think he’s not up to managing a social network?”
And Tesla software doesn’t work right, and people have been killed.
Paul Graham must be a stupid fuck, easily parted from his money.
I, for one, have never once thought he was up to managing Tesla or SpaceX!
Thanks for pasting that out.
The hero I needed. Thank you
406 Not Acceptable
Here’s an alternative: https://archive.is/85h06
Strange, works for me
Yeah, no idea. I’m still getting the same error on both WiFi and cellular service on my iPhone. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I was hoping somebody would post a link with no paywall. Thanks!
I’ve seen people spouting this off a few times just today in respects to mastodon “is just as easy as email. People need to stop making excuses and use the alternatives”. A few counter points.
- the vast majority of people are computer illiterate
- email is not “easy” to a lot of people in the same way twitter/ig/etc are
- Those evalgelizing “it’s just like email dude” are probably more tech savvy (they’re here after all)
- email may be easy but it’s garbage and a 20th century solution and we are in the 21st century now
- Not everyone has the same level of patience to understand all this federated nonsense
We (royal we) need to drop the “it’s easy just learn it bro” nonsense. It’s not the same. It’s not like email. There’s a reason it’s not mass adopted yet and a lot of that is the complexity compared to the current products.
/rant
Why is my post here and not a reply? Because apparently replying to someone was giving me “Error: language_not_allowed” whatever that’s supposed to mean lol
True. Except email
- doesn’t de-federate from each other
- doesn’t host a community (sub) that’s replicated on the others
- etc
For starters… it’s difficult even for those technically advanced.
My thought: IF it survives and outgrows a centralized site, it might still fizzle out and die when one instance outgrows the others and decides “why do we need the others if we have the bigger user base with the most subscribers?” And then we’re back to square one.
Oh wait… this is about Mastodon, not Lemmy… point still stands for ActivityPub as a whole.
doesn’t de-federate from each other
Lulz.
Do you know what it feels like to get your personal email server banned by gmail and/or outlook.com? Its like you can’t email anyone after that.
Yes. In that example, the bigger instance defederated the smaller one, but banning is an extreme case. You’d be relegated to junk/spam filters for a while before that for only those providers but your email works everywhere else.
My main point still stands. Most email providers play nice but what if Gmail suddenly said “Your email won’t work except with other Gmail users”?
deleted by creator
Agree to some extent. I think a better approach would be to explain why it is worth learning rather than claiming it is easy. It isn’t terrible to learn but for the average user, yeah, it is a bit arcane especially compared to existing centralized platforms.
Unfortunately no one cares. Really, no one cares. People will simply keep sucking on Zuck’s tits because it’s easy, and this is not.
Because apparently replying to someone was giving me “Error: language_not_allowed” whatever that’s supposed to mean lol
Quit making excuses and learn to use Lemmy, LOL. \s
(What it means is that Lemmy lets you select which language your post or comment is written in so that people who don’t speak it can filter it out, but assuming you’re not trying to set an invalid language on purpose, some kind of bug occurred.)
I am genuinely curious. What’s the role of the new CEO if this turd keeps doing everything he can to burn this ish to the ground?
Such theories are compelling, but they all share a flaw, in that they presuppose both a rational actor and a plan. You may not find either here.
Beautiful.
I like that even Elon fanboys I know have started to realise what a complete idiot he is, how you can fuck up running Twitter so bad is incomprehensible.
Hopefully with him burning it into the ground people see him for the charlatan he is and stop giving him so much respect.
Nobody should use anything this guy is involved with.
This really raked him over the coals.
Pretty cathartic to read this as it deconstructs just how fraudulent his genius, Tony Stark-esque image turned out to be.
I don’t understand how someone so stupid can be in charge of so much.
Musk really sucks huge dick
Wasn’t that always the plan?
Yeah. A bad move from Elon Musk.
It was the social-media equivalent of Costco implementing a 10-items-or-fewer rule, or a 24-hour diner closing at 7 p.m.—a baffling, antithetical business decision for a platform that depends on engaging users (and showing them ads) as much as possible.
I stopped reading shortly after this, because the rest was paywalled…
