Elon Musk's X, formerly called Twitter, disabled a feature that let users report misinformation about elections, a research organisation said on Wednesday, throwing fresh concern about false claims spreading just before major U.S. and Australian votes.
Quite the broad stroke you have there. Not everyone on Twitter is peddling conspiracies. Sure it’s a dumpster fire, but there is an actual science community with noteworthy people still making worthwhile contributions to the conversation in that space against all odds. Etc.
Entirely false, I cannot believe so many people actually believe this. There are so many people with actual verified respectable reputations going under their own names there that I cannot possibly take you seriously.
edit: as I said to someone else here:
I mean, let’s see here, how many credible people can I think of on Lemmy?
Not a single one, because we’re all anonymous random people. The only shred of credibility here is sharing something a fairly well validated website or news source… exactly like on Twitter. You act like no one on here posts questionable things that get removed. That is selective delusion for you.
Right but without verification I can go be David Attenborough and there’s not much way to figure it out, unless there’s another person claiming to be Attenborough.
The less famous and in the media a person is, the harder it is to know if their account is legitimate.
Depending on community driven accountability without tools means that new community members have no idea what is credible, only what is popular. That can be gamed, whereas accountability and reputation won’t be.
The loss of tools doesn’t negate existing reputation, it diminishes the ability to build reputation, and the community will continue to atrophy.
Taking such an extreme stance is a bit histrionic, try less relying on extremes and personal attacks like “delusional”
Well it’s a good thing that reality doesn’t revolve around your opinion.
edit: I mean, let’s see here, how many credible people can I think of on Lemmy?
Not a single one, because we’re all anonymous random people. The only shred of credibility here is sharing something a fairly well validated website or news source… exactly like on Twitter. You act like no one on here posts questionable things that get removed. That is selective delusion for you.
False. The implication is that information shared by people not on Twitter, such as here, is more credible than information shared by someone on Twitter.
Try harder, you idiots are boring.
edit:
Also, the stupidity of the assertion that no one on Twitter has credibility is enhanced by the raw fact that possibly every single person who writes the articles that are shared here on Lemmy from sources deemed trustworthy by some percentage of you also happen to have Twitter accounts. At some point, it becomes an inherently ignorant argument.
Quite the broad stroke you have there. Not everyone on Twitter is peddling conspiracies. Sure it’s a dumpster fire, but there is an actual science community with noteworthy people still making worthwhile contributions to the conversation in that space against all odds. Etc.
It doesn’t matter if it’s everyone or noone, because the mechanisms to make the determination if it is or not are being removed.
This devalues all of that conversation.
Entirely false, I cannot believe so many people actually believe this. There are so many people with actual verified respectable reputations going under their own names there that I cannot possibly take you seriously.
edit: as I said to someone else here:
I mean, let’s see here, how many credible people can I think of on Lemmy?
Not a single one, because we’re all anonymous random people. The only shred of credibility here is sharing something a fairly well validated website or news source… exactly like on Twitter. You act like no one on here posts questionable things that get removed. That is selective delusion for you.
Right but without verification I can go be David Attenborough and there’s not much way to figure it out, unless there’s another person claiming to be Attenborough.
The less famous and in the media a person is, the harder it is to know if their account is legitimate.
Depending on community driven accountability without tools means that new community members have no idea what is credible, only what is popular. That can be gamed, whereas accountability and reputation won’t be.
The loss of tools doesn’t negate existing reputation, it diminishes the ability to build reputation, and the community will continue to atrophy.
Taking such an extreme stance is a bit histrionic, try less relying on extremes and personal attacks like “delusional”
In my opinion you lose all credibility if you are on shitter or truth social.
Well it’s a good thing that reality doesn’t revolve around your opinion.
edit: I mean, let’s see here, how many credible people can I think of on Lemmy?
Not a single one, because we’re all anonymous random people. The only shred of credibility here is sharing something a fairly well validated website or news source… exactly like on Twitter. You act like no one on here posts questionable things that get removed. That is selective delusion for you.
Nobody’s arguing there are credible people here on lemmy, that’s a strawman you’ve set up.
False. The implication is that information shared by people not on Twitter, such as here, is more credible than information shared by someone on Twitter.
Try harder, you idiots are boring.
edit:
Also, the stupidity of the assertion that no one on Twitter has credibility is enhanced by the raw fact that possibly every single person who writes the articles that are shared here on Lemmy from sources deemed trustworthy by some percentage of you also happen to have Twitter accounts. At some point, it becomes an inherently ignorant argument.