It's not about the cost of the service, it's that it's a pointless endeavour it's never going to succeed. Every social media company succeeds or fails based on the network effect.
Where did I mention Elon?
Where did I mention Elon?
People are interested in what the government has to say and mostly multipliers (aka Journalists) are reading the actual news.
It's good to have a accessible publication Plattform that is not subject to US policies (private or public ones), just in case the environment in Twitter gets undesirable.
I assume running this servers costs roughly nothing and they can shut it down at any time.
If EU would buy a big share of Titter it gives money to Elon, if from FB you give the money to Mark etc.
You are implying that is pointless me to have a person website because I will not succeed to be more popular the FB or Twitter. The joke is on you I have a personal website and I run a blog and some static pages. EU is not attempting to defeat Twitter,
It makes sense (if your logic circuits work) that you should have a backup communication method because
1 Twitter or FB because they might block you and your then need to fight with AI bots to unblock your stuff
2 there might be users that do not use Twitter or FB
3 Twitter and FB might not respect user privacy so it is imporal to publish only on those
> You are implying that is pointless me to have a person website because I will not succeed to be more popular the FB or Twitter. The joke is on you I have a personal website and I run a blog and some static pages. EU is not attempting to defeat Twitter
Again never said that.
Backup communication methods don't work if no ones uses them do they?
> 1 Twitter or FB because they might block you and your then need to fight with AI bots to unblock your stuff
Normally when you have a controlling stake in a company you can have an input in how it operates.
> 2 there might be users that do not use Twitter or FB
There's also people who don't use the internet? what's your point?
>3 Twitter and FB might not respect user privacy so it is imporal to publish only on those
EU agencies already post on Facebook and Twitter, what's your point ?
I think that's a valid concern if your main goal is to create a social network, but less so if you're trying to create a reliable and trustworthy organ for government communication.
> Where did I mention Elon?
This:
> > Why don't they buy a considerable stake in these American social media companies instead of trying to reinvent the wheel that is deflating as soon as it launches.
does not refer explicitly to Elon, but Twitter is a much more common organ of government communication than any other big American social-media company, so it seems disingenuous to pretend that this wasn't at least suggestive of buying a considerable stake in Twitter (and so giving money, indirectly, to Elon).
Which social-media companies did you mean? If Twitter is among them, then that is, at least indirectly, giving Musk money; and, if not, then it's hard to see how buying that stake would help to ensure communications reliability, since Twitter seems to be much more common than any other American social-media company as an organ of government communication.
Exactly, which is why I'm asking: when you said "buy a considerable stake in these American social media companies", which social-media companies did you mean?
If I was talking about a specific company I would have said "Why don't they buy a considerable stake in {insert social media company}"
So you're saying it's not about the money, it's about sending a message?