Well, it was the users that were against it from the beginning. Staff were concerned. Management and shareholders were the only ones celebrating it.It's funny how quickly they went from "heck no, stop him from taking over the company" to "lets sue him to force him to take over the company".
I'll enjoy watching Musk squirm a little though.
Management are obliged to look out for the shareholders best interests.Well, it was the users that were against it from the beginning. Staff were concerned. Management and shareholders were the only ones celebrating it.
Well, it was the users that were against it from the beginning. Staff were concerned. Management and shareholders were the only ones celebrating it.
Exact experience for me. The algorithm doesn't work the same for every topic. If you stumble upon say a workers right video, and you subscribe and like, you would expect to get something similar recommended, but that odds are will not be the case... You might get some cnn garbage, or some comedy from john oliver or whatever. What I do now is look from within the content i like for people to recommend ( sometimes in the comments, sometimes in the video itself), or even host similar people producing similar content. Takes longer than it would with the algorithm, but it works... Word of mouth, of the digital age. To search youtube you need near perfect wording to get what you saw/heard when it comes to obviously unfavored contents.I just heard a good thought about what's the real problem with these monolithic social media platforms, that includes twitter, youtube, etc. That their database is not searchable, the users get served something by their algorithms, and the algorithm is not fair, or open. What, you say youtube has a search function? No, that is not a search function, that is a highly censored and curated list you get served disguised as search results.
Youtube search has been useless for years in my experience, it tries to serve me irrelevant stuff or worse the exact opposite of what I searched for.
While the uisers were Reeeeing, the staff was breaking down, and the managemnet was curled into a ball the shareholders were in the corner and Musk looked at them and smiled... then the band started playing... IT WAS A BAORDROOM BLITZ!!!!! YA YA YA YA!!!Users were REEEE'ing, staff was in mental breakdown mode, management was curled up in a corner crying, board was in panic mode and shareholders were like "YES $$$$$$$$"
IMO, the real problem with those sites is that they exist and they make standard people feel like what they have to say should be important with no reason for being so other than they exist as well.just heard a good thought about what's the real problem with these monolithic social media platforms, that includes twitter, youtube, etc.
Not even that works sometimes as certain videos / channels get shadowbanned. Even if you search the exact video title it won't come up.To search youtube you need near perfect wording to get what you saw/heard when it comes to obviously unfavored contents.
No, it should be entirely up to the audience to decide whose content is interesting, and not youtube suppressing one person while promoting others unfairly.IMO, the real problem with those sites is that they exist and they make standard people feel like what they have to say should be important with no reason for being so other than they exist as well.
The exact problem is that often gibberish gets promoted while interesting and insightful content gets pushed down or outright banned by the bots/algorithm. Crap would be organically weeded out by the community if youtube let the users choose, but they don't trust the users, they treat them like children and want to control exactly what you get to watch.Reminds me of the “give a thousand monkeys a typewriter” experiment. Sure, you eventually get Shakespeare out of one of them, but the vast, wide majority of it is gibberish. But everyone seems to think their gibberish should matter.
Perhaps. I think I just don't give two $$its about social media in general, as I have the opinion most people are dumb, and whatever content they are creating and sharing and promoting is of equal value -- but I think that really only applies to "mass market" social media. Small niche sites have their audience and place, such as this one, and I encourage that, but once they become "big buisness" the business model changes and it just becomes about getting more content creators/content consumers and the push to monetize those streams... and then it ceases becoming a social function and is a predatory business instead. Except the people using it haven't realized they are both the product and the consumer, and pay for it both ways with various methods.No, it should be entirely up to the audience to decide whose content is interesting, and not youtube suppressing one person while promoting others unfairly.
Moderation is removing content that clearly and objectively violates some terms of service. But on youtube videos get deleted left right and center without even telling the uploader the reason. I think that fulfills the criteria of censorship.But you have a point about content moderation (I won't call it censorship, I reserve that term for when the body moderating has some sort of actual meaningful authority over the users)
You honestly think that the moderation on the big social media platforms isn't one sided? Yes both sides complain, because one side wants even more censoring and silencing of voices that do not agree with them, while the other side wants more free discourse. I'd hate to be on the side that wants to censor more.The responses to my post are a perfect example of the selective nature of human beings. My observation was based on the people I interact with and the sources that I saw, others have/had a different experience. I doubt seriously social media is as one-sided as either side contends.
That's entirely missing the point. Search algorithms were getting great by the mid 2000s. Now they are useless, because they are deliberately made useless to control what you can and cannot effectively find. As I've said they are not really search algorithms anymore they are mass manipulation algorithms.As for search algos, they suck.
This my experience exactly with search.You honestly think that the moderation on the big social media platforms isn't one sided? Yes both sides complain, because one side wants even more censoring and silencing of voices that do not agree with them, while the other side wants more free discourse. I'd hate to be on the side that wants to censor more.
That's entirely missing the point. Search algorithms were getting great by the mid 2000s. Now they are useless, because they are deliberately made useless to control what you can and cannot effectively find. As I've said they are not really search algorithms anymore they are mass manipulation algorithms.
It’s trivial social media. If you don’t like how it’s run, find another site? It’s not like Facebook is going to cut off your food supply or throw you in the gulag.You honestly think that the moderation on the big social media platforms isn't one sided?