Elon Musk and Twitter

[Anselm]

I read an interesting conspiracy theory about this.   At one time the country folk despised Japanese vehicles.  Now they love Toyota trucks.  Musk wants to win over middle America and get them to embrace EV's and solar power which right now is most popular with the coastal elite.   

[ergative]

But historically, across cultures and through history, the younger generation has been expected to rebel against authority, and doing so is almost considered a sign of maturity. Young adults advocating stronger authority seems unprecedented.

But, perhaps related to the above comment and what counts as 'fearful offspring', I would argue that young adults doing things like demanding disability accommodations and recognition of neurodiversity is, in a way, rebelling against authority. Maybe governments and administrations mandate that such things be recognized, but as we've seen on these boards, and among our colleagues, there's quite a bit of resistance to that sort of accommodation of 'snowflakes'. So from the perspective of the zoomers, there are two sets of authorities in play. Seeming to crave one does not mean that you're not rebelling against the other.

Fair enough, but by supporting (or even encouraging) government policing of speech requires one to believe that the government has and will continue to have the "correct" ideas of what speech to suppress. (Obviously, since any attempt in the future to tell the government they are not doing it correctly will itself be subject to the government's suppression.) In other words, to trust the government to limit speech would seem to preclude having the kind of ambivalent attitude toward authority mentioned above; it requires a conviction that the level of government allowed to police speech is and will continue to be benevolent.
You're not rebelling against any authority that you give permission to silence you.

I mean, yes, sure. Any time we demand that the government exercise its powers to our (perceived?) benefit, we run the risk of it then turning around and using those same powers to our detriment. Over-powerful governments are dangerous. But if we go too far with that kind of caution, and deny governments all power, we end up with libertarian dystopias overrun with bears.*

We're always yoyoing between extremes. It would be real nice if we could converge on an asymptotic compromise, rather than the long-term sinusoidal culture war we've got going on right now.

*This is an outstanding book, by the way. Highly recommended. Superb narrative style.

[RatGuy]

I was on Twitter in the late-aughts for the comedy. One of my friends dropped out of grad school because she was hired onto the writing staff of a CBS sitcom -- recruited from her Twitter account. I miss those days.

There are a lot of "Trump ruined twitter" style claims, but I think he successfully capitalized on what many Tea Partiers were doing before him. It's what gave us the Birther movement. And I'd argue that back then Twitter was a lot more unmoderated, but it only became scrutinized due to the ways in which Trump and his cohort used it. So I do think that the standards have been changed since that time in 2010 when I was doxxed and cyberstalked. At that point I had very little recourse; I don't think that's the same now, and I don't think that Musk's ownership will return us to that either.

[ciao_yall]

How long can he and his investors afford to lose money on this deal?

From the New York Times. I think this will end in shareholder lawsuits.

[ergative]

How long can he and his investors afford to lose money on this deal?

From the New York Times. I think this will end in shareholder lawsuits.

It is very rare that something as big and expensive as this news has had consequences almost entirely limited to rich assholes. I've been enjoying the ride immensely all summer. Guilt free entertainment!

[marshwiggle]

But historically, across cultures and through history, the younger generation has been expected to rebel against authority, and doing so is almost considered a sign of maturity. Young adults advocating stronger authority seems unprecedented.

But, perhaps related to the above comment and what counts as 'fearful offspring', I would argue that young adults doing things like demanding disability accommodations and recognition of neurodiversity is, in a way, rebelling against authority. Maybe governments and administrations mandate that such things be recognized, but as we've seen on these boards, and among our colleagues, there's quite a bit of resistance to that sort of accommodation of 'snowflakes'. So from the perspective of the zoomers, there are two sets of authorities in play. Seeming to crave one does not mean that you're not rebelling against the other.

Fair enough, but by supporting (or even encouraging) government policing of speech requires one to believe that the government has and will continue to have the "correct" ideas of what speech to suppress. (Obviously, since any attempt in the future to tell the government they are not doing it correctly will itself be subject to the government's suppression.) In other words, to trust the government to limit speech would seem to preclude having the kind of ambivalent attitude toward authority mentioned above; it requires a conviction that the level of government allowed to police speech is and will continue to be benevolent.
You're not rebelling against any authority that you give permission to silence you.

I mean, yes, sure. Any time we demand that the government exercise its powers to our (perceived?) benefit, we run the risk of it then turning around and using those same powers to our detriment.

Yes! That's exactly what any adult is expected to see, the possibility of things being turned around. And that's what young people seem to be oblivious to. Some other examples:

• "Oppression" of group A by group B has always existed, and will always exist.
• Cancelling people for things they said or did decades ago, or even historical figures, for things done centuries ago, based on the conviction that what they did or said then is an accurate reflection of what they think now, (or would think now if they were alive). In other words, personal values are immutable and are totally unaffected by culture.

Over-powerful governments are dangerous. But if we go too far with that kind of caution, and deny governments all power, we end up with libertarian dystopias overrun with bears.*

We're always yoyoing between extremes. It would be real nice if we could converge on an asymptotic compromise, rather than the long-term sinusoidal culture war we've got going on right now.

Again, you've nailed it; this is exactly what seems to be beyond the grasp of many young people; the idea that oscillation is normal, and that extremes always come with problems. (The very term "progressive" implies that "progress" is some clear and unambiguous goal, and thus being "progressive" means moving from bad to good, with the ideal endpoint entirely irrefutable.)

*This is an outstanding book, by the way. Highly recommended. Superb narrative style.

Sounds interesting.

[ergative]

But historically, across cultures and through history, the younger generation has been expected to rebel against authority, and doing so is almost considered a sign of maturity. Young adults advocating stronger authority seems unprecedented.

But, perhaps related to the above comment and what counts as 'fearful offspring', I would argue that young adults doing things like demanding disability accommodations and recognition of neurodiversity is, in a way, rebelling against authority. Maybe governments and administrations mandate that such things be recognized, but as we've seen on these boards, and among our colleagues, there's quite a bit of resistance to that sort of accommodation of 'snowflakes'. So from the perspective of the zoomers, there are two sets of authorities in play. Seeming to crave one does not mean that you're not rebelling against the other.

Fair enough, but by supporting (or even encouraging) government policing of speech requires one to believe that the government has and will continue to have the "correct" ideas of what speech to suppress. (Obviously, since any attempt in the future to tell the government they are not doing it correctly will itself be subject to the government's suppression.) In other words, to trust the government to limit speech would seem to preclude having the kind of ambivalent attitude toward authority mentioned above; it requires a conviction that the level of government allowed to police speech is and will continue to be benevolent.
You're not rebelling against any authority that you give permission to silence you.

I mean, yes, sure. Any time we demand that the government exercise its powers to our (perceived?) benefit, we run the risk of it then turning around and using those same powers to our detriment.

Yes! That's exactly what any adult is expected to see, the possibility of things being turned around. And that's what young people seem to be oblivious to. Some other examples:

• "Oppression" of group A by group B has always existed, and will always exist.
• Cancelling people for things they said or did decades ago, or even historical figures, for things done centuries ago, based on the conviction that what they did or said then is an accurate reflection of what they think now, (or would think now if they were alive). In other words, personal values are immutable and are totally unaffected by culture.

Over-powerful governments are dangerous. But if we go too far with that kind of caution, and deny governments all power, we end up with libertarian dystopias overrun with bears.*

We're always yoyoing between extremes. It would be real nice if we could converge on an asymptotic compromise, rather than the long-term sinusoidal culture war we've got going on right now.

Again, you've nailed it; this is exactly what seems to be beyond the grasp of many young people; the idea that oscillation is normal, and that extremes always come with problems. (The very term "progressive" implies that "progress" is some clear and unambiguous goal, and thus being "progressive" means moving from bad to good, with the ideal endpoint entirely irrefutable.)

*This is an outstanding book, by the way. Highly recommended. Superb narrative style.

Sounds interesting.

I mean, and old people too. The maga-crowd trends older, and they're bending to the right just as hard as the zoomers are bending to the left. Like entropy. Also, don't forget that it's the oldsters who have been bemoaning the miserable downfall of civilization at the hands of youngsters since the ancient Greeks. There are fuzzy thinkers in every age group.

Also, just because oscillation is normal doesn't mean it's good. Ideally we'd be able to arrive at a middle that doesn't require us to oscillation between extremes to deliver the average. (I'm reminded of a very old SF story in which someone talks about a planet with a wildly cold night and wildly hot day--like, shifts between -100 and +240---and then conclude, 'but the average is 70 so it's suitable for human habitation.' Old SF wasn't not very good on the S, and not terribly well written in the F. It boggles the mind how some of that junk got revered as the 'golden age'.)

[waterboy]

Just curious - how many here have Twitter accounts that they actively use? I have one that I used once probably 8 years ago for one specific thing. I really have never seen the point to Twitter.

[Ruralguy]

Never used it, but I don't think I am the target demographic (probably not the target demo for anything but "old guy" stuff).
I barely even follow it indirectly in the press. It seems to be a megaphone for rich jerks.

[jerseyjay]

I have a twitter account.

I post to it when I have an article that is being published, or a talk on my research.

I follow it to keep up with other scholarship, and also events and other such things.

It is useful, but if it were to disappear, I would not cry.

[Sun_Worshiper]

I have a twitter account.

I post to it when I have an article that is being published, or a talk on my research.

I follow it to keep up with other scholarship, and also events and other such things.

It is useful, but if it were to disappear, I would not cry.

Same here.

[dr_evil]

I have a Twitter account, but don't usually post to it. I used to look at it to follow a few individuals I was interested in for various reasons. I haven't looked at it in ages because 1) it became a big time suck and 2) I was avoiding news for a bit because it was getting me down. I think now it's time to delete my account...if I can remember my password.

[downer]

I follow a lot of people. I learn about books, articles and videos from them. Sometimes I see interesting discussion. Then there are the cat videos.

I haven't formulated a definite point at which I will delete my Twitter account, but I'm ready to do it if it is part of a general surge. There are of course many alternative platforms, but none is very popular.

[dismalist]

Just learned from another discussion board that Musk plans to charge for Twitter's Bluecheck. I had to google what that meant! :-)

So, it looks like he's gonna charge individuals for successfully  broadcasting.

Of course, the rates he charges can vary by the degree of success! Everywhere one looks, price discrimination, price discrimination. Halloween candy and universities and tweets.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Doesn't seem like Musk came in with much of a plan.