Page 5 of 26
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 1:01 pm
by Boustrophedon
Hunting Dog wrote: Fri Nov 04, 2022 12:21 pm
Little waster wrote: Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:34 am
The Indy too but sadly they went for the clickbait site trick of filling every available pixel with intrusive ads and obnoxious pop-ups so you get a migraine even trying to access the content.
A "brave" decision given they stopped the dead-tree version.
I actually paid for access to the Indy (the first 3 months for £3 thing) - I cancelled it within a month - most of the time it didn't seem to recognise that I'd signed in with an account, despite it saying my name at the top of the screen! When it did recognise I had an account it made the whole thing worse as it kept refreshing the page (moving the bit I was trying to read) presumeably because it was hiding the ads...
I have found lately, with Chrome that some sites only work at exactly 100% size, no zoom. Any attempt to zoom and things like the cross to close a popup will be off the f.cking screen.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 1:05 pm
by Grumble
If I open a link from Twitter quite often I find the website constantly refreshes and jumps back to the top. I think this might be because of how Apple close down trackers etc. but it’s sodding annoying.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 2:07 pm
by plodder
This has turned into a thread about how the internet has been ruined
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 4:26 pm
by jimbob
Twitter has had a massive drop in revenue, due to activist groups pressuring advertisers, even though nothing has changed with content moderation and we did everything we could to appease the activists.
Extremely messed up! They’re trying to destroy free speech in America.
.
In other news the same person complaining has begun mass layoffs of staff, reportedly including moderation staff
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 8:01 pm
by lpm
The concept of "cool" is a strange one.
Humans are so bizarre you can get them to buy expensive products they literally burn and need to buy again, while giving themselves the misery of ill-health and premature death, if you manage to convince them it's "cool".
My guess is having a blue tick and big twitter presence used to be thought "cool" by suckers who wasted their lives on twitter crap. Now suddenly it's "uncool".
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Fri Nov 04, 2022 9:50 pm
by jimbob
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 8:27 am
by lpm
Thermonuclear war against the advertisers is a "courageous" business decision.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 10:31 am
by bjn
If I could be arsed I’d look up Twitter’s last financial statement as a public company and make a guess on how soon it runs out of cash. Will Musk have to start selling huge chunks of Tesla shares to keep it going? Will that tank the Tesla share price? Will that make me amused?
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 11:42 am
by Fishnut
Listening to the latest Opening Arguments podcast it seems Musk has already hurt Tesla's stock price as he needed to sell so much of his to fund the purchase. Iirc the shareholders may be sueing him as a result of this. He has to double the value of Twitter from its selling price (which was higher back when the sale was originally agreed compared to when he finally bought it) just to cover the loans he's had to take out. It could be glorious to watch.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2022 1:05 pm
by jimbob
bjn wrote: Sat Nov 05, 2022 10:31 am
If I could be arsed I’d look up Twitter’s last financial statement as a public company and make a guess on how soon it runs out of cash. Will Musk have to start selling huge chunks of Tesla shares to keep it going? Will that tank the Tesla share price? Will that make me amused?
I liked this take on internationalskeptics.com
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/fo ... st13937966
Lothian wrote:I agree fully with Musk's wholesale culling of Twitter staff. The model of losing money hand over fist is only sustainable when there is an idiotic muppet out there willing to buy the company for several times its value. That scenario no longer exists.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 11:58 am
by plodder
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2022 5:54 pm
by dyqik
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 6:50 am
by Woodchopper
I started a new thread for discussions on Mastodon
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 7:12 am
by Woodchopper
Musk is trying to stamp out impersonation.
Possible that there are some hints of where it’s going.
Twitter encourages as many as possible to go for a verified account that costs money.
Free accounts exist but users can opt to only see tweets from the verified (eg no retweets or mentions from free users). Having a presence would cost the monthly subscription. If not someone will probably just be a passive browser.
As we’ve discussed before, this would have different effects.
It would make it feasible to cut down on the amount of personal abuse that people experience.
But it would be a big problem for people who need anonymity - eg women activists in Iran. They’d need to trust Twitter with their personal data.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 10:14 am
by plodder
Those people aren’t profitable though, and neither are the bleeding hearts that want to hear from them.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 10:32 am
by Opti
- Fg7mcYeXwAAo_Zk.jpg (82.77 KiB) Viewed 6166 times
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:11 am
by jimbob
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2022 7:12 am
Musk is trying to stamp out impersonation.
Possible that there are some hints of where it’s going.
Twitter encourages as many as possible to go for a verified account that costs money.
Free accounts exist but users can opt to only see tweets from the verified (eg no retweets or mentions from free users). Having a presence would cost the monthly subscription. If not someone will probably just be a passive browser.
As we’ve discussed before, this would have different effects.
It would make it feasible to cut down on the amount of personal abuse that people experience.
But it would be a big problem for people who need anonymity - eg women activists in Iran. They’d need to trust Twitter with their personal data.
He can't be that ignorant of how that would affect the advertising revenue and its influence?
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:24 am
by dyqik
jimbob wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:11 am
Woodchopper wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2022 7:12 am
Musk is trying to stamp out impersonation.
Possible that there are some hints of where it’s going.
Twitter encourages as many as possible to go for a verified account that costs money.
Free accounts exist but users can opt to only see tweets from the verified (eg no retweets or mentions from free users). Having a presence would cost the monthly subscription. If not someone will probably just be a passive browser.
As we’ve discussed before, this would have different effects.
It would make it feasible to cut down on the amount of personal abuse that people experience.
But it would be a big problem for people who need anonymity - eg women activists in Iran. They’d need to trust Twitter with their personal data.
He can't be that ignorant of how that would affect the advertising revenue and its influence?
Not mention it removing the reason for most users to be there - to find interesting interactions with people who aren't famous.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 11:48 am
by Gfamily
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 1:41 pm
by Stranger Mouse
Grumble wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 10:07 am
TopBadger wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 9:56 am
Gfamily wrote: Fri May 20, 2022 9:21 am
I think the 'natural born citizen' requirement will make that difficult.
He's a white rich privileged male - they'll find a way.
So was Arnie
And as we know from the documentary “Demolition Man” a Constitutional Amendment will be passed to allow him to be President
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 1:43 pm
by bjn
From what I understand you can just buy a blue tick without having to prove your identity. Which is rather going against the original purpose.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 2:30 pm
by Little waster
bjn wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2022 1:43 pm
From what I understand you can just buy a blue tick without having to prove your identity. Which is rather going against the original purpose.
As opposed to the new purpose of desperately trying to fill the howling void that's just opened up in Musk's bank account.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 2:36 pm
by lpm
bjn wrote: Mon Nov 07, 2022 1:43 pm
From what I understand you can just buy a blue tick without having to prove your identity. Which is rather going against the original purpose.
But you need a credit card.
So it depends if twitter lets you use a credit card in the name Hillary Clinton to buy racistDonaldTrump. Or if you can only buy a name that matches your credit card name.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 3:53 pm
by dyqik
Well, Elon has just told everyone to vote Republican tomorrow, so I guess Twitter is definitely going to be Fair and Balanced, and not an echo chamber at all now.
Re: tw.tter
Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2022 6:39 pm
by shpalman
https://twitter.com/zatapatique/status/ ... 3383676929
just occurred to me that the magnificence of the timeline this week is because this is a show about the most expensive mid life crisis ever, but narrated from the point of view of the sports car itself