Social credit in America - Politics invades personal finance

meed18 as not babylon bee, here’s my headline:

Legacy media publishes the fewest reports of back-to-back mass shootings ever because of the identities of the shooters:


Uh oh! That anchor and the pundit that spoke right after her just misgendered the shooter! After specifically announcing that Aldrich’s lawyers say all court filing will be using they/them pronouns, they immediately revert back to referring to Aldrich as “he/him” These bigots can’t even get someone’s gender correct immediately after reporting on it.


And then the commentator claimed that it was a ploy by his (edit. A thousand pardons. Their) lawyers. Everyone knows you can’t question the claim of a gender identity. Unless you’re desperately trying to reclaim your narrative that “they” is a right wing shooter.


we’ve finally found the limit on when the lgbtq community will not support the self-identification of someone claiming to be lgbtq - if they shoot and kill other lgbtq, they can’t be lgbtq themselves

anything short of mass murder, you’re still a bigot if you question self-ID

glad we cleared that up


Twitter reinstating all suspended accounts, which I guess is a level less bad than a ban. Some banned accounts, like Trumps, have also been restored (and Musk has been taunting Trump to start using it again, but he hasn’t since he’s trying to get his Truth biz working)

1 Like

I believe Trump has a non compete type contract w/ his biz too. See he follows some contracts/rules :wink:


The experience of gab shows what is facing Twitter. Gab is trying to build a parallel economy to the woke left wing Internet. See this interview with gab CEO, Andrew Torba. Cross posted here from the 2022 politics thread.

Some data show that the death of Twitter is greatly exaggerated.

The Data Show Twitter Is Far From Dying

In the end, Twitter confronts real challenges from its mass exodus of employees and advertisers. Yet, as the graphs above show, contrary to press and pundit consensus, Twitter’s users aren’t going anywhere. There simply is no completing platform that offers them the same self-reassuring forum of journalists, policymakers, and celebrities fawned upon by hundreds of millions who cheer them on or shout criticisms into the void. Perhaps the greatest change Musk’s purchase might yield is finally arousing concern from the press and policymakers about a handful of unelected billionaires controlling the modern public square.


What’s this nonsense? They’re talking about Twitter still having it’s userbase–true but irrelevant. The threat to Twitter is they were already in the red and lost a bunch of their income and they got rid of much of the technical people who keep it going (and that’s selective–the best people will be the ones that left.) Their ability to fix technical problem is seriously impaired by now–and problems do happen.

Twitter is a very simple product - what they have is a network effect that’s hard to screw up, as you can see by the various free speech Twitter clones having failed to gain much traction (Gab, Parler, Trumps Truth, etc). Here’s more detail on why Twitter is still working with lots fewer employees.


Apparently a lot of the daily operations and responses to hardware issues is done with the aurora framework

Aurora is a Mesos framework for long-running services and cron jobs.

What does Aurora do?

Aurora runs applications and services across a shared pool of machines, and is responsible for keeping them running, forever. When machines experience failure, Aurora intelligently reschedules those jobs onto healthy machines.

Yep. You can outsource the back end. Question is will advertisers pay for it.

Yes, this is a problem but with a much smaller headcount, Twitter needs fewer $$ to breakeven.

The large audience is a powerful draw as CBS learned when they did their short-lived pull out.

But advertising is the key issue


media outlets decreed that not only would greater free speech on Twitter usher in the usual parade of horribles they trot out when demanding censorship — disinformation, hate speech, attacks on the “marginalized,” etc. etc. — but this time they severely escalated their rhetorical hysteria by claiming that Musk would literally cause mass murder by permitting a broader range of political opinion to be aired. The Washington Post 's Taylor Lorenz even warned of supernatural demons that would be unleashed by these new free speech policies, as she talked to a handful of obviously neurotic pro-censorship “experts” and then wrote about these thinly disguised therapy sessions with those neurotics under this headline: “‘Opening the gates of hell’: Musk says he will revive banned accounts.”


Maybe i’m just really stupid, but I’m pretty sure common sense says that allowing such political opinions provides a harmless outlet for people with those opinions, reducing their need to resort to other means to convey their message.

They like to rail on the increase in mass violence as being a problem, yet ignore the fact that this increase coincides with their ever-growing censorship and suppression of “undesirable” opinions in society.

1 Like

As for Musk, he is predicting one billion users in a year. What a nightmare for many in Washington . . . one billion people discussing contemporary issues freely . . . without “editors” telling them what “the truth is.”

1 Like

New Twitter signups are probably mostly bots. Nothing has happened that would cause a bunch of people to be interested.

And just because the system still works doesn’t mean it will keep on working. It’s like a ship with nobody in the engine room–everything’s fine until it isn’t.



It’s an extremely basic website. Just text mostly. Some photos. Some video. From all accounts, Twitter was extremely bloated in the number of employees it had working for it prior to Elon’s acquisition. If his firings turned it into a ship with no one in the engine room, that doesn’t matter much since the type of ship is a sailboat.

I don’t particularly care about Musk one way or another. But it’s pretty silly to predict a site as basic as Twitter will crash because it doesn’t have hundreds of programmers and content moderators behind the scenes.

1 Like

It only matters when you are trying to use the medium to push an agenda and surpress alternative viewpoints. That does require a lot of employees.