dtjb

this isn't my full time job.

That would be a loss for twitter IMO. I know it's being remade into ground zero for culture war discourse, but there's nowhere else online like Twitter when it comes to breaking news and developing situations. Journalists and reporters sharing information as it's verified real time.

When something was going down, you went to twitter.

An important distinction, I think, is that Sweeney (@elonjet) appears to use a different tracker than the publicly available one. PIA is the freely available and public flight tracker, but can be put into private mode which Musk does. Sweeney then (likely) reverts to using non-public ICAO addresses which he identifies by manually coordinating Musk's known plane location/history.

I'm not an expert here, just sharing what I've seen. Please offer corrections.

https://twitter.com/scottwww/status/1490553502640140288/phot...

https://twitter.com/DavidSacks/status/1603533380150181888

we don't know anything about the "stalker" other than what Musk said. Musk has been caught lying about his children in the past [1] to justify his Twitter policy swings. I'd like to think he wouldn't stoop so low as to use his kid like that, but the truth is we don't know.

Now journalists are being banned for copying word-for-word the police response stating that "no police report was filed" over the stalker incident.

[1] https://twitter.com/justinemusk/status/1595506087570333696

Yes but unironically.

Who specifically is in charge of the algorithm at Twitter? Keep in mind the recent foreign interest financing and editorial changes. How are we certain they have our best American Interests™ at heart?

I'm not trying to play the whatabout card, I'm trying to understand how we would legally articulate what TikTok has done to justify banning by congressional decree. The senate bill [1] doesn't appear to have any measurements or values or clarifications, it's just a few paltry pages that never specify what line TikTok crossed. The only argument I'm hearing is China=Bad.

And who knows, maybe China is nefariously manipulating the TikTok algorithm, but for the US government to step in and say "these ideas are too dangerous, you can not access them," seems like the cure is as bad as the disease. It's using blatant authoritarianism to try to stop the spread of potential authoritarianism.

[1] https://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/1ebac814-15...

What line has TikTok crossed, specifically? Is it just the content? Global reach? Data governance? User count?

I too can predict conversation topics based on what's trending in Twitter. But Twitter is now owned (in part) by investors representing foreign interests, including KSA [1]. Recent editorial changes at Twitter have amplified "unamerican" rhetoric [2]. Does Twitter cross the same lines as TikTok?

Any "solution" that bans TikTok would leave behind a far-reaching precedent, one that is completely ineffective at dealing with the core problem. Trying to stand up a virtual iron curtain won't sit well with an american userbase that's accustomed to choosing the content they want.

Also, if there's one thing you can do to make young people more captivated and curious about something - make it forbidden.

[1] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/10/28/saudis-kingdom-hol...

[2] https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7zm9q/elon-musk-twitter-naz...

> Why would the US not do the same with TikTok?

Millions (?) of Americans have freely chosen to receive and interact with the app, wouldn't their freedom of speech allow them to enjoy the content they choose?

What is a "main information network?" Are websites ok? Podcasts?

What was murky about ProPublica? I thought SBF started a fund dedicated to pandemic preparedness, and ProPublica received a $5M investigative journalism grant from that fund (unrelated to crypto or financial regulation).

Did I miss something?

All the more reason why politicians won't throw him a lifeline. They gain nothing at this point by defending or supporting him.

It's not entirely the same, but we saw this with the Elizabeth Holmes case. The powerful people that supported her early on became her biggest detractors when the shit hit the fan. Their reputation was tarnished by association. They severed all support and publicly decried her as a fraud. We're already seeing the same [1] with SBF.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-17/bankman-f...

Asana needs document support. Nothing complicated, just a simple wiki or doc editor that lets us capture and link notes, findings, requirements, etc.

We ended up moving to ClickUp over this.

None of the main car makers can compete with Plaid, but the Polestar 5 on 800v architecture beats the Performance trim by 10-15% (872 vs 778hp).

Teams for AR/VR environments

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/mesh

Is coffee "allowed" during IF periods?

I'd be interested in the stats, but my perception is that he (and his products) are much more well-known now than before. I always saw his foray into politics as a very aggressive niching strategy. He saw Trump's momentum and hitched his wagon.

He might have lost Costco and their low margins, but he picked up an army of high-margin D2C sympathizers who have been shown to be generous with their money (if the cause is right).

It's getting worse. Most US states [1] have started to use the phone siren system for injured cops as well. Regardless of your politics on this, what exactly am I supposed to do with a notification at 2AM that a cop was shot 400 miles away? Seems like the phone alert system is being used to push public perceptions rather than public safety.

[1] https://cops.usdoj.gov/BlueAlert

Recent discovery documents show that user engagement is driven by a disproportionately small base of power users, a group that has been shrinking even before the Musk takeover [1].

I don't think the masses especially care who owns the platform. But the power users probably do, especially as big changes around content, editorialization, and monetization are being discussed.

If that small base of power users continue to leave, then the masses stop coming to the site.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-where-did-tweet...

>a relatively small problem

This is an overcorrection to OPs comment. If Nvidia knew about the very real risk of fire but continued to push unsafe products with misleading statements, that is a significant problem and hints at a fundamental rot within the company.

It actively thwarts that goal.

I don't mean this as snide as it sounds, but really, who cares?

What purpose does that last sentence serve?

They fully acknowledged the danger to the general public. That can be true while also acknowledging the hysteria [1] present in many law enforcement agencies.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/13/magazine/police-fentanyl-...

Isn't the proper term whatever people choose to use to describe themselves?

The fact that Microsoft detected malware is already known, publicly.

How we spend our time is as much a personal decision as how we spend our money. People can make all sorts of judgments about what's "normal," but in the end, if the person is satisfied and content with their life and they're not causing harm, then who cares how far they are from the median.

The article defines the term but it does a poor job justifying it in the context of this discussion. Sure, it can be a tool to weaken large companies which is a good thing I guess, but it doesn't address the fundamental idea that we have always traded value for value. If we don't like the trade, we don't make it.

I know people that read that much but we don't go around telling bookworms they're addicts.

It's up to each person to decide where the line is for them, where a satisfying hobby becomes a destructive habit. If someone has no desire to form external relationships and they're completely content with their life, good for them for figuring things out. I'm not going to impose my arbitrary rules on them.

I love RDR2 and play it passively (a few hours a week), but I completely get how someone could get sucked in like that. I can't think of any other game that provides such an immersive world, you can get lost in its details for hours on end. Just riding your horse around with no destination in mind is a very relaxing and almost therapeutic way to pass time.

Isn't the recourse then to ignore the product? Not take their stuff on your own terms just because you really want it?

I'm sure there are outliers, but I suspect you're right from a default policy perspective. I was too dismissive in my earlier comment.