• nikita@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    134
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    7 months ago

    This seems like further confirmation of that theory that I saw posted on here that the Saudi oil barons funded Elon’s purchase of Twitter for the sole purpose of destroying it. They want to silence online discussions of climate change and other left wing topics.

    Combined with Reddit being owned by Tencent, Facebook being eternally evil, and TikTok being unconducive to any form of coherent dialogue, there are not many places for left wing discourse on the internet anymore.

    • exscape@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      172
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      “climate change and other left wing topics”… I know that’s basically how it works in some countries, but it’s insane to consider certain scientific facts left wing, and we really shouldn’t support such statements.

      • nikita@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        68
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Thanks for pointing that out. It’s just so normal to think that way here that they’ve even corrupted me into framing climate change that way. It’s not a left wing topic; it’s a reality.

        I just hope young people who are thinking of voting conservative here keep in mind that those assholes literally don’t believe in climate change and by extension science and facts. That alone should automatically disqualify conservatives from anyone’s consideration.

        • reev@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          7 months ago

          It’s not a lack of belief, it’s just an abundance of “fuck you, I got mine”.

      • stellargmite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        7 months ago

        Politicising climate change was yet another distraction from dealing with it in a cohesive and unified manner. Divide and conquer.

      • Justas🇱🇹@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes, in Europe, most political parties, both left and right, have their own climate change mitigation policies, because if they don’t, they risk just not being elected.

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          7 months ago

          Also no mainstream political party in Europe dares to touch Universal Healthcare.

      • WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        The reason it’s overwhelmingly called “climate change” instead of global warming now is because of language change pushed by billionaire foundations. The Koch network specifically focus grouped and created the term change. Whether we want it considered left wing or not, the billionaire backed right has made such statements left wing.

        • loobkoob@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          7 months ago

          The reason it’s overwhelmingly called “climate change” instead of global warming now is because of language change pushed by billionaire foundations.

          I do think “global warming” struggles to convince some more simple people anyway, unfortunately. Because while the average temperature of the globe is increasing and causing the changes in climate that we’re seeing, I’ve come across far too many comments from people saying things like “global warming must be a myth because it snows more than it used to” and things themselves smarter than all climate scientists combined for that observation.

          Of course, those same people probably think global warming is good because they like their summer holidays so perhaps their opinions shouldn’t matter much either way!

        • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          7 months ago

          Is this really true?

          Idiots would walk around on cold days saying “see - this global warming stuff is bullshit”.

          Climate change describes the danger much more aptly.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          7 months ago

          Climate change was adopted because global warming doesn’t intuitively line up with winters being much colder on top of the average temperature being higher.

    • WhatsThePoint@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I’ve had the same theory for a while. They saw the Arab Spring and other populist movements. With their vast oil wealth, tanking Twitter was a small price to pay to re-fracture descent and silence the left. The concentration of wealth has given insane power to wealthy who skew overwhelmingly on the side of themselves. The rise of the right is a direct result of billionaires funding across numerous avenues. The right aligns best with their self interest. They played the long game because they only have to pay people and let them do it for them. Regular folks have to stay engaged in the battle after working to support themselves. Billionaires are the matastasized cancer of capitalism.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      7 months ago

      The purchase itself was a leveraged buyout, they didn’t pay the entire $44bn as Twitter took out a loan to cover $13bn. Like all leveraged buyouts (eg Toys R Us) the purchase itself is meant to kill the business. Even before Musk started screwing the revenue there was little hope Twitter could pay the interest, let along the principle. Now, Twitter is worth less than the debt, by some estimates.

    • Diabolo96@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Twitter is really big there. It’s basically the most used social media by a vast majority compared to other ones. It’s way more plausible that some ‘too much rich to know what to do with all the money’ Saudi princes decided something like a few percent of their wealth to own the biggest social media on their country for bragging rights and admin privilege to be worth it. Plus, they probably thought Twitter was too big to fail and die, They didn’t expect Elon would fuck it up so bad. I don’t think anybody expected Elon to fuck it up so bad.

    • baru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 months ago

      This seems like further confirmation of that theory that I saw posted on here that the Saudi oil barons funded Elon’s purchase of Twitter for the sole purpose of destroying it.

      Then why did Twitter needed to sue him to get him to abide by the deal? Musk often promotes stuff in a pump and dump scheme. One of the many examples is when he briefly promoted bitcoin. He made loads of money off that.

      I’m guessing he thought he could make a lot of money quickly in some way. But then interest rates rose quickly and whatever he was planning fell through.

    • Larry@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Conservatives are desperately trying to force TikTok to sell because even though its format is garbage, it’s gathered a large leftwing userbase

    • Syntha@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      This seems like further confirmation of that theory that I saw posted on here that the Saudi oil barons funded Elon’s purchase of Twitter for the sole purpose of destroying it.

      Then why does it still exist? Musk took Twitter private, they could’ve just pulled the plug if they wanted to.

    • moup@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Why would they spend billions for this when they could (and still can) just block the website? It’s not like you can sue the King in Saudi Arabia (lest you think you have too many heads)

  • Heresy_generator@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It’s completely absurd that he’s saying this as an anti-bot measure. The bots exist because they generate revenue for the scumbags behind them, a small fee is just going to be part of doing business for them. He’s not trying to stop bots, he’s trying to monetize them and use them as an excuse to charge everyone. “The bot problem” will never be fixed and will be used as an excuse for every anti-user measure they put forward.

  • Stalinwolf@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    94
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    7 months ago

    Meanwhile, everyone will bitch about the absurdity of this and how shitty Musk and his followers are, then continue to use the platform daily as though it’s an essential service. Anyone who hasn’t jumped ship my now is either complacent or wholly supportive.

    • BURN@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      What’s the alternative for one-to-many communication? I don’t use the platform anymore, but I miss a massive amount of news related to most of my hobbies due to it, normally relying on Reddit users to repost them. It’s incredibly annoying to have to search through 10+ social media pages to check for updates about a race team during a race or an ongoing gaming event.

      Mastodon doesn’t have anywhere near the adoption necessary, bluesky still hasn’t taken off.

      • RaoulDook@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        There’s no need for an alternative. Twitter is simply not a necessity of any kind in reality.

        But use whatever you want, freedom is yours to exercise as you see fit.

        Personally I’ve never wanted to use Twitter, it just made me go “Yuck!” from day 1 of its existence.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s the rub, every social media service with any uptake is bad from a privacy perspective because the only real way to make them profitable is to sell ads.

        So, what are you looking to get out of it? RSS is still a thing, services like lemmy are decent at aggregating links (post the content you want, and hopefully others will help), and bookmarks work well if you just need a dozen or so sites.

        I honestly never use Twitter, Facebook, etc, and I feel like I’m about to keep tabs on things reasonably well.

        • BURN@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          I’m looking for live updates from race teams during endurance events, gaming news from specific creators, local traffic notifications and real time updates from sports teams leading up to games.

          These things don’t typically have articles to link to, so aggregators don’t work well, and are often behind the curve. RSS has no adoption anymore and doesn’t quite work anyways.

          • mark@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            RSS has no adoption anymore

            Not true. RSS feeds are the only thing I use these days and know quite a few others that do as well. Sure some sites may not have RSS feeds by default, but there are a ton of services that auto generate RSS feeds for you.

          • JamesStallion@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            None of those are essential serveices. There is no alternative, those are just not essential things. In order to get those non essential things we will all stay signed into for the neo nazi revenue and messaging machine.

    • atrielienz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t see that. I see a lot of people who assume these two groups are the same people. But most of us don’t use Twitter still. That’s why their non-bot userbase is steadily declining. People are leaving. People are abandoning the platform.

    • FilthyHookerSpit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      7 months ago

      Part of me really buys into the idea that Musk is pulling an evil mastermind move with his other billionaire pals, destroying one of the biggest social media sites to keep users fractured. End goal keeping any community small and unable to organize at scale. Then the voice of reason tells me this just another egotistical nepo baby trying to staunch the hemorrhaging of money from his last bad investment.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is still my opinion. I hated shitter before boy wonder musk took over. It sucked before and it sucks worse now. Just kill it.

  • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    I genuinely have to wonder if Musk is intentionally trying to kill Xitter, because if he’s actually trying to recoup his “investment” he’s going about it completely the wrong way

    • Grimy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      There was a theory that he was paid by a country like Saudi Arabia to take it down, sinces it’s a powerful tool for a repressed population. Twitter was very important during the Arab Spring.

      I scoffed at it before but it’s starting to seem very plausible.

    • shortwavesurfer@monero.town
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a numbers and modeling game. If we charge this much, how many users will we lose? If that number is less than what you will make by doing the change, then the change is worth doing.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      7 months ago

      The purchase itself was a death sentence. $13bn of the $44bn was a loan Twitter took out to buy itself on Musk’s behalf, even before Musk started tanking the revenue there was no way Twitter was going to be able to pay the interest on that without further cash investment.

      Meanwhile, given that the business in unviable, Musk can try all sorts of crazy shit and are what sticks to the wall. Anything that proves successful can be adopted by whatever comes after Twitter or other social media. Charging for API access stuck, this is just the next attempt.

    • paf0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      Maybe he’s just trying to make it cheap enough for Dorsey to buy it from him.

  • BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    Who is going to pay to post on twitter? Not only has he destroyed what was there but he’s stopping any route for growth with new users. Most people won’t bother.

    He really has managed to destroy that company with his knee jerk decisions.

  • Nomecks@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    7 months ago

    Who would have thought that Twitter would become the new Somethingawful forums, and that Musk would take the role of Lowtax.

          • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            7 months ago

            The blowtax shock-site days are long gone. With occasional exceptions in containment areas like the pink forum and the debate forum, SA’s culture is acceptable-to-laudable these days. Effortposts on the leftist board are a life-changing force for personal betterment, and goons remain some of the most charitable nerds anywhere.

            And despite all of that, it is still funny.

    • yumpsuit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’ve seen web writers claim that the original brain trust of Weird Twitter started from a Something Awful clique

    • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Add lootboxes and timers.

      If you don’t pay to post, there’s a 50% chance of your post getting deleted after anyone sees it. Pay some money to get more favorable odds. Oh, but you don’t but that stuff with money. You gotta use xitter turds first that, and some times you can get those from xitter boxes. In order to buy the lootboxes, you have to spend real money.

      If you haven’t bought any lootboxes in a month, xitter will take control of your account and start automatically posting flat earth nazi crypto trash.

    • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Pretty much. 1usd per bot I’d a small price for maintaining a bot farm.

      Or do they plan on banning accounts that use the same billing info? If CNN or BBC pay for their employees accounts, would they get banned?

  • hperrin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    That’s not what free speech is, and there never has been free speech on Twitter, and that’s mostly a good thing. Jesus.

    • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      7 months ago

      That’s not what free speech is

      Well yeah, obviously. It’s just wordplay based on the two common definitions of free.

      Everybody knows what free speech means. It’s just a bit of wordplay that you’ve taken very literally.

      • affiliate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        Everybody knows what free speech means.

        i really dont think so.

        free speech is a pretty complicated thing and i feel like many people dont have a solid grasp on it. i think a good number of people think they know what free speech means because they know “it only applies to what the government can do to you”, but there’s quite a bit more to it than that. like how to deal with hate speech, threats, misinformation, disinformation, etc.

        and this is directly related to the problems twitter is facing: elon musk started out by saying hes a “free speech absolutist”, but twitter has been slowly rediscovering why “free speech absolutism” doesnt work. and you can see those discoveries in real time with twitter reintroducing moderation policies (among other things)

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Ok then. People know enough about what it means to know it doesn’t refer to not having to pay a fee to open your mouth.

          It’s very clear that the headline is a little wordplay joke. It doesn’t literally convey that the journalist thought free speech means you don’t have to pay to make a twitter post. You’re taking it way too literally.

          elon musk started out by saying hes a “free speech absolutist”, but twitter has been slowly rediscovering why “free speech absolutism” doesnt work.

          I’m in agreement that it doesn’t work.

          But it should also be called to attention that Musk never tried free speech absolutism on his platform (not that I think he actually should). He has been willing to bend over backwards in assisting dictatorships in censoring content, and he culled a lot of left-leaning and anti-Musk accounts/comments on day one. It’s always been a lie to pander to the freeze peach crowd.

    • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      Elon Musk said free speech like once and then immediately threw a bunch of journalists off the site. And apparently every news article for the rest of my life is going to be about how he was hypocritical instead of whether he wants power or influence or has power and influence or the meaning of giving him those things.

      Don’t trust every industrialist you meet even if they invested in one company where competent people make cool space ships. He’s clearly on Ket and some uppers. Grimes divorced him and her music isn’t even good. He’s not that complicated.

  • dragontamer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    I stole this line from someone else, but its great.

    Elon Musk has invented fee speech, not free speech.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      52
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a clever line, but Musk hasn’t invented a single goddamn thing in his life.

        • smoothbrain coldtakes@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          SA used to be great. That move actually made the forums a pretty good place for a while because it kept out a few demographics including bots and kids.

          Something Awful, YTMND and Newgrounds were basically the comedic engines of the internet back then.

          Good 'ol pre-YouTube internet.

    • Coreidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      You don’t know what free speech means.

      This is like claiming Blizzard is infringing on your free speech because they banned you from world of Warcraft for saying racist shit.

      Better yet. This is like claiming blizzard is infringing on your freedom of speech because they deactivated your account as a result of you not paying your subscription.

      Do better.

      • Larry@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Corporations should be allowed to own vital services so they can ban people from them at will. This is a good thing somehow. I love monopolies that suppress activists and organizers because it would only be bad if the government is doing it.

        • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          We could stop thinking of Twitter, Facebook, etc. as “essential services”.

          They can both fuck right off and most people’s lives will not be negatively impacted.

        • Coreidan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          That’s the thing about private property and private services. They can terminate your involvement at will for any reason. It’s in the user agreement you consent to when you sign up.

          You’re not entitled to these services. They aren’t your god given right or any other bullshit you’re imagining.

          Comparing this to freedom of speech is laughable.

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    When will people stop supporting this clown?

    Remember when some people were like “well, I don’t support him, but I’ve had this Twitter account forever, so I’m not leaving.” This is what happens. Things just get worse until you gain plausible deniability for continuing to support the bullshit.

    • index@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Perhaps when his name/companies will stop being on the headlines every single day multiple times. Unless it’s something really big that could actually harm his reputation people should restrain from posting and upvoting news about him. This article is about shit that hasn’t happened yet, this guy is tricking you all around.

  • THCDenton@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    7 months ago

    I hate that twitter has the seo that it does. I always accidentally click on a link to see the “log in or get fucked” screen.

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Its staying power is really annoying TBH.

      I guess it could be worse (AKA everyone just going to Discord instead).