Apple Is Holding the Final Nail for X’s Coffin
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
You can always install custom apps on Android and Valve is only one of many stores, so I'm not sure they really come under control at all...
Super Admin’s first action: delete other super admins!
I'm disgusted at how we transform such fantastic things as personal computer and turn them into such limited object.
No newspaper has published every single letter anyone sends to the editor without using some discretion.
But the main point is that it's the newspaper's own editor, following the newspaper's own editorial line (and possibly the law)
The fact of the matter is that everything is gatekept. If you want something done right (as in, not subject to someone else's rules), do it yourself, and you'll find you too will gatekeep after you've spent the considerable effort required to build your own device/OS/appstore ecosystem and social media service, and then someone comes along and tries to tell you how you should run things.
Don't forget about the most important part: putting what you wrote in front of millions of peoples' eyeballs. No pen/notebook company does that. And if they did, you're not entitled to the vast amount of labor that entails.
The labor resources would ideally be reduced by only doing hosting, and to check if the deployed app doesn't contains a malware, not on whether the app follows the guidelines created by some assholes in California.
By example, I'm completely creeped by Apple's relations to pornography, and how that impact apps such as Grindr. I'm creeped by the article's suggestion that Apple may remove the Twitter app "to protect" it's user from seeing Alex Jones content. In the same way, I wouldn't want my chinese-made phone to "protect" me from political opinion unsavory to peoples in Beijing.
That is why I really prefer the web vision of just deploying stuff on a domain you own, with a server you rent, and importantly no such thing as a whitelist of accepted domains curated by the browser maintainers. Of course even then there are limits to the kind of thing you can put in there, but nowhere near as much as those done on App stores.
I'm french, and despite both being western countries, there's enough cultural differences between France and the US to make me really despise any attempt at content control by platforms who I believe should stay culturally neutral; instead I just see people having accepted this level of cultural influence as being normal, even beneficial.
edit: And if it is not obvious, I don't endorse nor do I like Alex Jones. I'm just pointing that banning X from appstore because Alex Jones is on the platform (with other XXX milions of users) is illogical and dangerous.
What I'm trying to say is that I am grown up and I can police my space myself, I don't need a corporation to do it for me in this cases. I would be ok with a ban if like 90%+ content on an app is obnoxious or scammy. But X has hundreds of millions of users. A lot of them are like Alex Jones, but much more of them are not.
To be honest, I can more easily, or am recommended more often obnoxious stuff on Facebook (which I stopped using), Reddit, or Instagram (stopped using, but it also promote fake identities and generates a lot of mental health issues, especially for younger girls), and don't get me on TikTok (which I refuse to create an account on ever) which is an ultimate cesspool of a network. There is also Telegram with thousands of groups sharing smutty war stuff and hard core propaganda.
Why don't we ban all of them then? Any network with more than 100 users because at least one at that point will be obnoxious or a sociopath or somebody with view most of us would not agree with?
Unfortunately, blocking somebody doesn't always mean you're done with it.
I’m not worried about you because you appear to think. I am worried about the millions of people out there that simply believe whatever they are fed (some of them are my friends). Not sure if censorship is the answer, but we have to figure something out so we don’t slip into very big problems because of the mindless masses.
Sure, but which ones are provided to you as choices when you open an account with no context? A few weeks ago people were doing some sampling of that and ended up with almost entirely right/far-right lists. I wouldn't be surprised if Alex joined that list soon. (He's on it indirectly already since Elon is recommended)
Or when do Apple’s supposed corporate principles demand it no longer take the 30% it enjoys from sign-ups to X’s premium services?
Why the snipe at Apple's principles? They sure like money, but it hasn't stopped them from blocking countless apps in the past.
I think their principles are genuinely held but, as with any business, they won’t make knee-jerk decisions as they have to also consider impact on shareholders.
Heads we win, tail they lose.
We will never have "truth" in media. It is always controlled by people in position of power.
Platforms will always choose to moderate contents themselves, rather than to provide social tools for the users to indicate where the truth lies. Therefore companies will remove thumbs down. It is up for their algorithms to decide what you see, and what is not seen.
They will always prefer to host Oversight boards rather than produce social platforms tools for the users to moderate contents.
Normally that wouldn't be a problem and way within their rights but unfortunately everyone (including officially elected politicians) somehow chose twitter/x as their official communications channel. It gives that company pretty much full power to sway any political discussion should it want to while also keeping people without an account (like me) completely out.
I'm not sure how to solve this problem. I would help electing better politicians but every potential candidate also uses twitter/x for their campaigning.
[1] https://www.thedailybeast.com/elon-musks-odd-behavior-may-be...
[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-psychedelics-burni...
[3] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/17/tesla-board-members-reported...
X is already gone from my Home Screen to a folder. Second page! I struggle to see it having any relevance in the future at this rate.
— Benjamin Franklin
It is kind if said so, that despite all the success Musk had he still is so insecure to crave attention at every cost.
I think he really does just have far-right sympathies.
There are parties in Europe organizing their own militias, the Italian right wing has at best sued critics, which is bad but not "storm capitol hill" bad.
Regardless, they are pretty indisputably on the very far right of the overton window
* One mentions it, once, saying it's similar to french FN (which wikipedia does not consider as "neo-fascist").
* one mentions one of the party leaders, twice, and once says he belongs to a "neo-fascist party"
* one mentions it in a footnote.
None of these represent a political analysis, but they do show how you can manipulate wikipedia with
I agree 100% that FdI is far right, despicable, and as far from my personal ideas as a party can be.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/09/gi...
* the far right shares ideology and slogans with fascism
* FdI leadership comes from the background of post-fascist parties
but neither makes them neo-fascist, based on the fact that _all the right parties in the world_ shares the same slogans, and FdI has (in words) reneged what the fascism has been. La Russa, who is one of the most dreadful characters in the party, took the time to cite the liberation of Italy from fascism as a shared national value when he was elected as chair of the senate
In contrast, Italy does have actual neo-fascist parties such as Casapound and Forza Nuova, with people marching dressed in black, and with programmatic goals which include abolishing the current prohibition to re-establish the fascist party in Italy.
I dislike what Meloni stands for, and we should call out everything bad her government does, without need to call her "neo-fascist".
But yes, I do consider hanging out with Epstein and Bush in my evaluation of people as well.
Jones, hell, from a certain point I get it, this guy brings traffic. Tate is just bottom of the barrel scum so, and it ia pretty pathetic for the formerly richest man of the world to promote the manosphere, that is more a thing for third rate, butt hurt youtubers who cannot cope with women having a mind of their own.