Twitter is a Private Company
paulsurovell said:
ridski said:
paulsurovell said:
Some people still advertising on Twitter
Aren't you subscribed to Twitter Blue now? You're literally renting an emoji for $8 a month.
ETA: Maybe if you get popular enough, Elon will buy it for you like he did with Stephen King.
Twitter Blue now enables 10,000-character tweets and formatting, as well as editing posted tweets. There are more advantages that I'm not familiar with/don't take advantage of but probably also worth more than $8 a month to people who use them.
Don't be duped by the Elon-haters who say it's about "an emoji".
Actually, based on the Twitter timeline, paulsurovell gets enough **** for hawking his rented emoji there, so there's no real need for me to pile on here.
ridski said:
Actually, based on the Twitter timeline, paulsurovell gets enough **** for hawking his rented emoji there, so there's no real need for me to pile on here.
"Piling on" is the MO of the MOL clique. "A sandbox" to quote a former local mayor.
nohero said:
paulsurovell said:
Twitter Blue now enables 10,000-character tweets and formatting, as well as editing posted tweets. There are more advantages that I'm not familiar with/don't take advantage of but probably also worth more than $8 a month to people who use them.
https://twitter.com/figgityfigs/status/1651174186692255744?s=20
Thanks, but this is clearer:
https://twitter.com/paulsurovell/status/1651705908404076544?s=20
jamie said:
paulsurovell said:
Twitter Blue now enables 10,000-character tweets and formatting, as well as editing posted tweets. There are more advantages that I'm not familiar with/don't take advantage of but probably also worth more than $8 a month to people who use them.
Don't be duped by the Elon-haters who say it's about "an emoji".
That's so dumb. The whole point of a tweet was the character length. They should change the name completely? I don't find it to be "elon hating" at all.
You aren't taking into account threads, that are commonplace and can go into thousands of characters.
As my stalker pointed out above, here's a case where I converted a relatively short thread by a typical knee-jerk Elon-hater into a single formatted tweet:
https://twitter.com/paulsurovell/status/1651705908404076544?s=20
paulsurovell said:
Thanks, but this is clearer:
https://twitter.com/paulsurovell/status/1651705908404076544?s=20
The bottom line -
https://twitter.com/figgityfigs/status/1651256276297347072?s=46&t=kGDZHidFJt92GAt4ntXO9Q
paulsurovell said:
You aren't taking into account threads, that are commonplace and can go into thousands of characters.
As my stalker pointed out above, here's a case where I converted a relatively short thread by a typical knee-jerk Elon-hater into a single formatted tweet:
https://twitter.com/paulsurovell/status/1651705908404076544?s=20
If Twitter truly is a Public Square as you claim, do you have stalkers or just people who take your pamphlets and pin them to the notice boards?
Also, yeah. Threads. How everyone can posts longer thoughts for free.
paulsurovell said:
"Piling on" is the MO of the MOL clique. "A sandbox" to quote a former local mayor.
lol
paulsurovell said:
Time to pile on Schumer:
What's the price to rent Chuck Schumer's gray emoji?
paulsurovell said:
Time to pile on Yoon:
lol - good for musk and electric cars. I thought this was the twitter thread? Why should we pile on Yoon? Tax breaks are very common when building new plants.
ridski said:
paulsurovell said:
You aren't taking into account threads, that are commonplace and can go into thousands of characters.
As my stalker pointed out above, here's a case where I converted a relatively short thread by a typical knee-jerk Elon-hater into a single formatted tweet:
https://twitter.com/paulsurovell/status/1651705908404076544?s=20
If Twitter truly is a Public Square as you claim, do you have stalkers or just people who take your pamphlets and pin them to the notice boards?
Also, yeah. Threads. How everyone can posts longer thoughts for free.
In a true Public Square, the individual has the right to choose who they want to speak to, listen to, or take their pamphlets to.
On the question of whether longer posts to express "longer thoughts" are preferable to threads of 280-character posts, we can look at MOL as an exemplar where both options are available.
On the other hand, if $8 a month is beyond reach or the individual doesn't have "longer thoughts" I agree there's no incentive to sign up. I put you in the latter category.
We pile on Putin, Trumpenstein and the muskrat also… this sandbox is open to piling. If you come in here whining you will get sand in your underwear…
I mean, the whole idea of twitter, a private company, being a "public" square was a problematic premise to begin with -- even more so now that it's a private company that's no longer even publicly traded but fully owned and operated according to the whims of a single reactionary billionaire who wants you to pay for speech.
jamie said:
paulsurovell said:
Time to pile on Yoon:
lol - good for musk and electric cars. I thought this was the twitter thread? Why should we pile on Yoon? Tax breaks are very common when building new plants.
I've seen a number of slurs on this thread directed at Musk on non-Twitter matters, and no one has complained. Funny, isn't it?
By the way, if you read the article, Yoon also expressed interested in South Korean companies' involvement with SpaceX. And Tesla is not just EVs, it's also one of the leading solar power/ storage batteries in the world.
Just out, perhaps the most important document ever produced to address the existential threat of climate change (fully consistent with the work of Stanford prof Mark Jacobson):
https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/Tesla-Master-Plan-Part-3.pdf
paulsurovell said:
I've seen a number of slurs on this thread directed at Musk on non-Twitter matters, and no one has complained. Funny, isn't it?
By the way, if you read the article, Yoon also expressed interested in South Korean companies' involvement with SpaceX. And Tesla is not just EVs, it's also one of the leading solar power/ storage batteries in the world.
Just out, perhaps the most important document ever produced to address the existential threat of climate change (fully consistent with the work of Stanford prof Mark Jacobson):
https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/Tesla-Master-Plan-Part-3.pdf
I don't get it - why did you post it here? Will you post all musk news for an expected response from us (time for everyone but you to pile on)? It's like you want to expose something else here. hmm Not exactly your usual whatabouting - not sure what I would call it.
paulsurovell said:
https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/Tesla-Master-Plan-Part-3.pdf
again - I don't see anything about twitter in here - might be a good topic for a science thread!
PVW said:
A public square is one where the more you pay, the more speech you get?
I mean, the whole idea of twitter, a private company, being a "public" square was a problematic premise to begin with -- even more so now that it's a private company that's no longer even publicly traded but fully owned and operated according to the whims of a single reactionary billionaire who wants you to pay for speech.
That's a good argument for making Twitter a public utility, as well as Facebook, Youtube, Google etc., which would make them subject to the First Amendment.
In real life, the public square is dominated and controlled primarily by corporate mass media controlled by billionaires and the billionaire class, and secondarily by social media, where the users rely primarily on what they are fed by corporate mass media -- as occurs on this platform.
You don't get "more" speech on Twitter Blue, but you get more control over how you present it. And $8 a month isn't beyond the reach of the vast majority of working class Americans.
But of course the domination of the public square and public discourse by billionaires is of less concern than the $8 a month deal from a billionaire, who, although he has done and is doing more to prevent a catastrophic environmental future than anyone else, can be mindlessly labeled "reactionary". The reason for that contradiction can be found in the second paragraph above.
As for his politics, he is a reactionary. Yes, he also is a major player in aspects of electrification, but all that shows is that reactionaries also can be fans of electrification. It doesn't take away from the fact that he's anti-worker and that he publicly flirts with white nationalist figures and ideas. He's a rich white billionaire who prioritizes speech he agrees with and has a history of shutting down speech he disagrees with, and funnily enough the speech he agrees with is the kind that aligns with praising rich white billionaires.
As for Twitter, or FB or other social networks being a public utility, I've never found that to be an argument that makes much sense. Utilities are generally means of transmission, not the transmission themselves -- the pipes that deliver the water, not the coffee machine using that water, the wires that deliver the electricity, not the car charging up with that electricity. Or, if you want a communications analogy -- the phone lines are infrastructure, the actual phones aren't. I would not look to the utilities framework to address the problem of private companies having too much control over our online discourse, I'd look rather to anti-trust and consumer protections. We should have smaller and more channels -- more MOLs, no Facebooks. No single entity that can claim to be "the" public square, rather plethora of little squares, salons, coffee houses, cafes, etc.
paulsurovell said:
In a true Public Square, the individual has the right to choose who they want to speak to, listen to, or take their pamphlets to.
On the question of whether longer posts to express "longer thoughts" are preferable to threads of 280-character posts, we can look at MOL as an exemplar where both options are available.
Just don’t listen too closely. Only stalkers do that.
Jamie was smart enough to truncate single posts that compile long green chains of other posts, and I didn’t have to pay him a penny to do it.
DaveSchmidt said:
paulsurovell said:
In a true Public Square, the individual has the right to choose who they want to speak to, listen to, or take their pamphlets to.
On the question of whether longer posts to express "longer thoughts" are preferable to threads of 280-character posts, we can look at MOL as an exemplar where both options are available.
Just don’t listen too closely. Only stalkers do that.
Who said stalkers aren't part of the public square?
DaveSchmidt said:
Jamie was smart enough to truncate single posts that compile long green chains of other posts, and I didn’t have to pay him a penny to do it.
Elon did that with Twitter Blue, but I assume he hasn't matched Jamie's character limit (if there is one).
paulsurovell said:
Who said stalkers aren't part of the public square?
Section 2:C12-10 of the New Jersey criminal code, for one. Of course, that restricts rights only in the New Jersey public square, not your “true Public Square.”
And then there’s you, who, if I recall correctly, block them.
Using the word "stalker" to mean "person who reads something I post on a public site" is ridiculous, at best, and a dishonest personal attack at worst. It's probably more the latter.
Where do you go to get a restraining order against a stalker on social media? I think a block would suffice no? But what happens when said victim of the stalker is virtually saying the same thing across several sites? And the alleged stalker can see the same posts? If you’re posting your thoughts and opinions on a very public site you will get the attention you deserve.
Jaytee said:
Where do you go to get a restraining order against a stalker on social media? I think a block would suffice no? But what happens when said victim of the stalker is virtually saying the same thing across several sites? And the alleged stalker can see the same posts? If you’re posting your thoughts and opinions on a very public site you will get the attention you deserve.
Exactly. If I saw Paul in Ricalton Square setting up a table with a “All We Are Saying Is Give Putin A Chance” sign, it would be silly to say I’m a “stalker” if I mention that on a Ukraine thread here.
nohero said:
Using the word "stalker" to mean "person who reads something I post on a public site" is ridiculous, at best, and a dishonest personal attack at worst. It's probably more the latter.
“I’m up against stalkers and cliques and South_Mountaineer sock puppets.” It’s what Richard Hofstadter might have described as the Paranoid Style in the Public Square.
paulsurovell said:
In a true Public Square, the individual has the right to choose who they want to speak to, listen to, or take their pamphlets to.
On the question of whether longer posts to express "longer thoughts" are preferable to threads of 280-character posts, we can look at MOL as an exemplar where both options are available.
On the other hand, if $8 a month is beyond reach or the individual doesn't have "longer thoughts" I agree there's no incentive to sign up. I put you in the latter category.
That's my point. It's not a public square, it's a website run by a private company. As for your second point, I pay for other people's art, it's not really a rule of mine, but I generally don't subscribe to a pay service to produce it.
I wonder what examples people have in mind when they talk about actual public squares? Public spaces in the physical world tend to have physical, cultural, and legal restrictions, whereas people invoking the idea of a "public square" seem to be invoking some abstract idea of free for all (that concretely seems to mean their speech gets broadcast or received more favorably).
Although I said I don't find the framing of a "public utility" to be the right one, I'm curious what people who do like that framing mean by it. Like, just the practicalities of it. It seems clear to me that any "true" public square can't work as any sort of for-profit enterprise. And yet, even digital spaces incur real-world costs. Who pays for those, and were does that money come from? Doesn't seem like funding can be private, if it's a public square. So would it be government funded? We already see a lot of disagreement over public institutions like schools, were there's in theory at least the possibility of some rough consensus on what subject matter should be funded -- how is it going to go over telling conservative Christians that their tax dollars support a government-funded platform for promoting woke ideology, or telling Sanders supporters their tax dollars going toward platforming union-busting coal barons?
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
https://twitter.com/figgityfigs/status/1651174186692255744?s=20