cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/6374374
The Moral Case for No Longer Engaging With Elon Musk’s X::The former Twitter is incentivizing violent content, which will only become worse to stand out to users.
Great article, but this: “One thing the prior Twitter management didn’t do is actively make things worse. ” Is dead wrong.
Twitter was always a problem, though in the earlier days it was just annoying, both before and after Trump they actively set everything on fire for money. And they know it. It took an armed insurrection to finally kick him off, and even that was “temporary”.
No wonder they all shat themselves with glee when Elmo dumped 45 billion on them and told them to gtfo. They were going to crash anyway. Dumbass.
Oh man, they were so happy Muskrat bailed them out. I mean, hell, they went to court to make sure the purchase went through.
The media rage-baiting over every single stupid shit he utters is “engaging.” The man thrives on it.
He’s just a younger Trump with a few more brain cells. Not that much more though.
Does he really have a few more brain cells? I haven’t seen anything that shows he’s been successful for any other reason than he started out rich and some right place right time situations.
I get the feeling that his engineering background, slight as it may be, helped him to hire competent people to run Tesla and SpaceX, and made it possible for those people to convince him not to insist on doing really stupid things.
Since he knows absolutely nothing about social media websites, not even enough to know what he doesn’t know, it’s impossible to stop him from carrying out whatever nonsensical plans happen to come to mind.
deleted by creator
Careful Bloomberg. He’s going to threaten to sue you for lost ad revenue just like he tried to do to the ADL.
I wish I had the knowledge and skill set to create an all encompassesing filter that purged all items involving people like Elon and trump. With the caveat that I get a dozen notifications for the headline “X gets sentenced to Y years behind bars.”
I remember yearrrsss ago, when I still used Facebook, there was a filter where it would replace all baby pictures you could care less seeing with dogs or cats. It would definitely be very popular if you could do this instead.
Completely off topic. Shouldn’t it be “couldn’t care less” as there is no possible way for you to care less than you do about the topic. Over “could care less” stating that you do care and you could actually care less, we don’t know how much you currently care, but we can assume it’s more than 0.
Not trying to be pedantic, generally interested in the right phrasing as I’ve heard both and that’s how I personally interrupt it.
Honestly, I don’t know lol. I didn’t put a lot of thought into it. You are probably right.
It is correctly spoken as “couldn’t care less” but dumbasses who don’t think about what words mean changed it to “could care less” to the point that this is basically the idiom, as idiotic and nonsensical as it is.
People get really balled up about that. It’s funny to me. I think:
- Couldn’t care less <- Absolutely lowest level of care
- Could care less <- It’s possible to care less, but I still don’t care much
Smoothbrained plebs publish another article about X! News at 11!
Dude, you understand, right, that no matter how much you e-suck E-lon’s e-dick he won’t be giving you any of his billions? You get this, right? Right!?
No one should be using Twitter unless their business depends on it. I feel bad for those people as Musk’s shit can’t be easy to deal with.
