Musk & Twitter
-
@No-Quarter said in Musk & Twitter:
Nah, fibre is a much better option if you can get it, much more stable/reliable and won't be interfered with by atmospheric conditions.
Definitely, but the gap is getting smaller. Latency is/was the big issue for satellite broadband but with LEO satellites it's way less of an issue (probably about 20ms v 15ms for fibre). Weather is def an issue, but that can be alleviated if Musk throws up enough satellites.
At the end of the day, as ever, I suspect it will come down to price and marketing.
-
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
From what we've seen, the previous management were less than open and ethical in their handing of the issue and we now have Dorsey admitting what he said in 2021 (even to to a congressional committee) was actually wrong.
It's a start, but there's a long way to go and the problem of the free-speech v harms still exists, but this seems a better way of doing things.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
From what we've seen, the previous management were less than open and ethical in their handing of the issue and we now have Dorsey admitting what he said in 2021 (even to to a congressional committee) was actually wrong.
It's a start, but there's a long way to go and the problem of the free-speech v harms still exists, but this seems a better way of doing things.
First rule of tsf club. Don't talk about moderation.
-
@Bones said in Musk & Twitter:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
From what we've seen, the previous management were less than open and ethical in their handing of the issue and we now have Dorsey admitting what he said in 2021 (even to to a congressional committee) was actually wrong.
It's a start, but there's a long way to go and the problem of the free-speech v harms still exists, but this seems a better way of doing things.
First rule of tsf club. Don't talk about moderation.
this place is moderated?
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
From what we've seen, the previous management were less than open and ethical in their handing of the issue and we now have Dorsey admitting what he said in 2021 (even to to a congressional committee) was actually wrong.
It's a start, but there's a long way to go and the problem of the free-speech v harms still exists, but this seems a better way of doing things.
Some of the most shocking stuff I've read has nothing to do with politics - it's the complete lack of IT controls Twitter has had in place over the years. Apparently there was no controls over what staff could do with their computers, e.g. install whatever they want, and access to the Production environment was not locked down at all - something like 5000 staff had full access to it! Which is just bananas.
-
@No-Quarter said in Musk & Twitter:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
From what we've seen, the previous management were less than open and ethical in their handing of the issue and we now have Dorsey admitting what he said in 2021 (even to to a congressional committee) was actually wrong.
It's a start, but there's a long way to go and the problem of the free-speech v harms still exists, but this seems a better way of doing things.
Some of the most shocking stuff I've read has nothing to do with politics - it's the complete lack of IT controls Twitter has had in place over the years. Apparently there was no controls over what staff could do with their computers, e.g. install whatever they want, and access to the Production environment was not locked down at all - something like 5000 staff had full access to it! Which is just bananas.
No Dev/Production separation, so they were just flinging shit live directly to production. Those 5000 people (not all IT roles) had direct access to sensitive data - including DMs.
So that's just incompetent. Means they couldn't lock down production when they were worried about (right wing of course) activist employees on Jan 6.
Best bit is they had spies embedded in their staff with all that access. Ones we know about so far were Indian. So think about all those arab spring type revolutions and government officials having access to DMs to organise that sort of stuff. Would have got people locked up/killed/disappeared...
-
@Kirwan said in Musk & Twitter:
No Dev/Production separation, so they were just flinging shit live directly to production.
i call that agile^2
-
@antipodean lol, what backlog!
-
@No-Quarter said in Musk & Twitter:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
From what we've seen, the previous management were less than open and ethical in their handing of the issue and we now have Dorsey admitting what he said in 2021 (even to to a congressional committee) was actually wrong.
It's a start, but there's a long way to go and the problem of the free-speech v harms still exists, but this seems a better way of doing things.
Some of the most shocking stuff I've read has nothing to do with politics
Less the politics for me, but the way the moderation seemed almost arbitrary and lacked consistency. Twitter is/was a hugely influential platform and they had a big responsibility there and the likes of Dorsey spoke fine words, but that was all they did.
Apparently there was no controls over what staff could do with their computers, e.g. install whatever they want, and access to the Production environment was not locked down at all - something like 5000 staff had full access to it! Which is just bananas.
Unbelievable. Sackable offence in any other industry, criminal offence in some. What happens when a management can't be arsed to manage - too busy patting themselves on the back.
-
@antipodean said in Musk & Twitter:
@Kirwan said in Musk & Twitter:
No Dev/Production separation, so they were just flinging shit live directly to production.
i call that agile^2
I'm sure there's a joke to be made here about children playing in sandboxes , but I can't frame it....
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
That's not what the recently banned journalists are saying.
-
@nostrildamus said in Musk & Twitter:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
That's not what the recently banned journalists are saying.
Weird.
The reason was given - doxxing.Nice to see MSM mentioning Twitter when it affects them but giving precious to no coverage of the recent revelations of its shady past.
-
@nostrildamus said in Musk & Twitter:
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
What I'm finding good with Musk's ownership of Twitter is the increase in transparency, particularly around why people were being banned and how moderation was implemented.
That's not what the recently banned journalists are saying.
Quite the opposite. Musk's Twitter has been very transparent on why those journalists were suspended for 7 days - they were publishing information on an individual's location and travel.
What those journalists were doing would be a potential criminal offence in Europe and the UK as it's regarded as stalking
-
@Frank said in Musk & Twitter:
Weird.
The reason was given - doxxing.
Nice to see MSM mentioning Twitter when it affects them but giving precious to no coverage of the recent revelations of its shady past.You have to have a little chuckle at CNN's complaint that stopping doxxing would have "a chilling effect on journalism" when CNN were happy to sack journalists who reported on human rights abuse in Bahrain when the Bahrain government complained.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
@Frank said in Musk & Twitter:
Weird.
The reason was given - doxxing.
Nice to see MSM mentioning Twitter when it affects them but giving precious to no coverage of the recent revelations of its shady past.You have to have a little chuckle at CNN's complaint that stopping doxxing would have "a chilling effect on journalism" when CNN were happy to sack journalists who reported on human rights abuse in Bahrain when the Bahrain government complained.
He gave a blanket reason, but it isn't clear those journalists were doing what he said they were all doing.
You dox, you get suspended. End of story," Musk said on the chat as Harwell rejected the assertion that he had exposed Musk's real-time location, saying he had simply posted about @elonjet.
-
@nostrildamus said in Musk & Twitter:
You dox, you get suspended. End of story," Musk said on the chat as Harwell rejected the assertion that he had exposed Musk's real-time location, saying he had simply posted about @elonjet.
You can only assume that Harwell didn't read the "This includes posting links to sites with real-time location info" part. Either that or he's being economical with the facts. As I mentioned, Musk has been crystal clear and transparent on this, which is really welcome after recent revelations.
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in Musk & Twitter:
@nostrildamus said in Musk & Twitter:
You dox, you get suspended. End of story," Musk said on the chat as Harwell rejected the assertion that he had exposed Musk's real-time location, saying he had simply posted about @elonjet.
You can only assume that Harwell didn't read the "This includes posting links to sites with real-time location info" part. Either that or he's being economical with the facts. As I mentioned, Musk has been crystal clear and transparent on this, which is really welcome after recent revelations.
I can see why he banned the account (it sounds like some crazy followed his kid), but if we are going to discuss transparency, he's also been on the record about not doing it, and to the best of my knowledge the account uses publicly available data.
-
@gt12 said in Musk & Twitter:
I can see why he banned the account (it sounds like some crazy followed his kid), but if we are going to discuss transparency, he's also been on the record about not doing it, and to the best of my knowledge the account uses publicly available data.
Yeah, but my point was about Twitter's transparency, the contrast with the previous management and the improved openness and discussion around moderation. That's improved - which is why this is being discussed - and I think that's a good thing. And while he may have been on the record about not doing it, changing Twitter's position after a stalker attacked a two year-old boy (his son) using that publicly-available data isn't unreasonable.
The "public information" bit is a real interesting one as there's plenty of cases of people being harassed both on social media & in real life by people using public information. It's an area of debate and, IIRC, some restrictions are going to be put in place on social media in the UK.
-
oh it is a can of worms but colour me surprised that a billionaire famous for non-emission cars doesn't want his not inconsiderable Airmiles discussed.
Speaking of which it is a very nice private plane judging by the photos on business insider accompanying an interview of the aforementioned security-conscious Musk (oh yes he had 2 planes at the time of the interview, but this could well be the nicer one-a Gulfstream G650ER). -
@nostrildamus said in Musk & Twitter:
oh it is a can of worms but colour me surprised that a billionaire famous for non-emission cars doesn't want his not inconsiderable Airmiles discussed.
Why do you think that? He has absolutely no problem being tracked - just not in real-time.