All of us, every single man, woman, and child on the face of the Earth were born with the same unalienable rights; to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And, if the governments of the world can't get that through their thick skulls, then, regime change will be necessary.
Saturday, January 04, 2025
Colbert CUTS OFF Talk Of CIA-Journalists Connection!
1 comment:
Anonymous
said...
Our goal is to maximize unregretted user-seconds. Too much negativity is being pushed that technically grows user time, but not unregretted user time.” - Elon
I applaud Elon for experimenting with how he optimizes for user engagement (i.e., "user time") and I think it's worth reflecting on what "optimizing" (i.e., "maximizing") means. It means, among other things, CENSORING SOME VOICES, WHILE PROMOTING OTHERS.
The people who told you that Twitter is a 'free speech' platform now that Elon took it over either (1) didn't understand how social media platforms work or (2) were lying to you.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
These companies run off advertising. The more "user time" (i.e., time spent engaging on the platform), the more money is spent by advertisers, and therefore, the more money for Elon.
"Unregretted user time" is another way of saying "we are trying to increase engagement without creating a toxic environment for your soul." That's good! ...and it WILL LEAD TO "CENSORSHIP." Just like ANY OTHER GOAL that you optimize for. Period.
The question isn't whether you support or don't support "free speech," which as we have already established DOES NOT EXIST ON SOCIAL MEDIA. The question is whether or not the goal you are optimizing for balances the profit needs of the business with the public good. Shocking, I know!
But guess what? This is what the major network broadcasters used to do! It was a fight for resources between the news division at CBS and CBS corporate. CBS executives understood that in order to keep their licenses they had to also serve a public function, which in practice meant earning enough money from their entertainment programming that they could afford to run their news operations at a loss. Why? Because they had a duty to help inform the public in a way that was (1) accountable to the facts and (2) helped build social cohesion, and ultimately, a national consensus, which was essential for winning the Cold War.
This is no longer the case. My argument FOR YEARS has been that THIS IS BAD and we should do something to FIX IT. Otherwise, our democracy WILL NOT SURVIVE the widening gyre of mis- and disinformation peddled by unrestrained government agencies, private actors, and governments. https://x.com/kofinas/status/1875703002280927402
1 comment:
Our goal is to maximize unregretted user-seconds. Too much negativity is being pushed that technically grows user time, but not unregretted user time.” - Elon
I applaud Elon for experimenting with how he optimizes for user engagement (i.e., "user time") and I think it's worth reflecting on what "optimizing" (i.e., "maximizing") means. It means, among other things, CENSORING SOME VOICES, WHILE PROMOTING OTHERS.
The people who told you that Twitter is a 'free speech' platform now that Elon took it over either (1) didn't understand how social media platforms work or (2) were lying to you.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FREE SPEECH ON SOCIAL MEDIA.
These companies run off advertising. The more "user time" (i.e., time spent engaging on the platform), the more money is spent by advertisers, and therefore, the more money for Elon.
"Unregretted user time" is another way of saying "we are trying to increase engagement without creating a toxic environment for your soul." That's good! ...and it WILL LEAD TO "CENSORSHIP." Just like ANY OTHER GOAL that you optimize for. Period.
The question isn't whether you support or don't support "free speech," which as we have already established DOES NOT EXIST ON SOCIAL MEDIA. The question is whether or not the goal you are optimizing for balances the profit needs of the business with the public good. Shocking, I know!
But guess what? This is what the major network broadcasters used to do! It was a fight for resources between the news division at CBS and CBS corporate. CBS executives understood that in order to keep their licenses they had to also serve a public function, which in practice meant earning enough money from their entertainment programming that they could afford to run their news operations at a loss. Why? Because they had a duty to help inform the public in a way that was (1) accountable to the facts and (2) helped build social cohesion, and ultimately, a national consensus, which was essential for winning the Cold War.
This is no longer the case. My argument FOR YEARS has been that THIS IS BAD and we should do something to FIX IT. Otherwise, our democracy WILL NOT SURVIVE the widening gyre of mis- and disinformation peddled by unrestrained government agencies, private actors, and governments.
https://x.com/kofinas/status/1875703002280927402
Post a Comment