Submitted by regalalgorithm t3_ym6j8h in MachineLearning
Hi all, many of us have gotten a lot out of being part of the AI community on Twitter, and right now things seem kind of bleak for the bird app.
So, The Gradient is launching a new Twitter-like space for the AI community - Sigmoid Social.
We hope to ensure the thriving AI Twitter community can live on by maintaining this Mastodon instance going forward. Join Here
We welcome suggestions and questions!
Unless you are a current employee or an influencer who for some reason wants but can't afford 8 bucks a month for a blue checkmark next to your name what exactly is wrong with Twitter which wasn't wrong a few months ago?
For me I'm weaning out mostly on point 5, never really liked Twitter but tolerated it because there was/is value in the community. If the community is moving I'll jump on the opportunity to move. 2 is also a factor, I don't believe in the absolutist free speech point of view and won't participate in that version of Twitter for the same reason I don't browse 4chan.
The things that have changed over the past week may be minor from certain points of view, but they can also be the straw that broke the camel's back. If people already weren't too fond of Twitter, any one of the minor changes might be enough to finally push them over the edge.
I would put better odds that eventually they're going to try to drive him off of control or force Musk to up the censorship to a more acceptable level or get kicked out than some nirvana of wildly popular decentralized social media springing up anytime soon.
I don’t think a 23 point swing in favorability and a growth in unfavorability in literally every group over the span of 2 months illustrates the point you’re attempting to make about Musk only growing in unpopularity due to “politics”. And that’s grown since June. But I’d love to see proof on one sided bans against the right, because this feels like the standard whining and false equivalency the right loves to espouse without any evidence. It’s wild to me that people who regularly simplify and misrepresent issues get into a data based field.
I didn't say only due to politics, I said largely. He's been the subject of heavy negative coverage starting around the time he started to really jump into politics that is probably partisan driven. but can have effects across party lines. But even disregarding that there are still huge differences between ideological groups. So yeah, politics isn't an irrelevant factor here.
In terms of your other question, Twitter keeps the best information to themselves and of course aren't going to release anything that makes them look bad and most of the media run interference for them but slightly more independent studies like these have found they suspend Republicans 5x more than Democrats.
https://www.newsnationnow.com/business/tech/is-twitter-really-biased-this-study-takes-a-look/
Of course most academics are also on team Progressive so they handwave it away with 'lulz misinformation'. But they can't deny the validity of the central fact that conservatives are targeted more.
Politics isn’t irrelevant but it is a dumb wedge case you’re making because your explicit bias in favor of right wing politics. I think it’s pretty much a no brainer that people on the left are going to like a guy less when he explicitly repeats right wing talking points, but that doesn’t explain the poll you linked showing republicans also liking him less over that same time frame. He’s becoming more unpopular with everyone, it’s just happening faster with people he’s explicitly setting out to upset, shocking.
Republicans being suspended more than democrats isn’t proof of bias against the right. I’m asking for data that specifically shows a double standard for the same actions. You’re not showing that. I imagine open fascists have the highest suspension rate of any political party but I don’t think that’s “one sided banning”, open fascists are just way more likely to explicitly break TOS, lol.
>wedge case
Also what is this? Did you mean its an edge case. And if so how?
Also using the word "dumb" and the term "no brainer" doesn't help people trying to understand your points any better.
Play on words with edge case and wedge issue :)
So you've moved the goalpost after I showed you how wrong your assumption was. Now showing some disparity among x race/gender/political groups isn't in itself enough to justify action or even curiosity? And further you'll proactively assume its a nothingburger rather than have an open mind? And you'll keep moving the goal posts.
Great! I've got you thinking like a 'FAR RIGHT racist sexist homophobic transphobic' conservative now. So what if blacks are arrested more? They probably commit more crime! So what if women are paid less? They probably don't work as hard on average! The groundwork is laid. Just shift the groups you apply your new logic to a bit and you too will know the pleasure of playing whack a mole with Big Tech in no time with your fellow 'neonazi fascist' rightwingers. Glad I could teach you something.
Mate when your argument relies on comparing oppressed groups in society that are oppressed due to no reason other than something they cannot change to people who openly choose to follow an ideology, the comparison starts to fall apart. You being right wing doesn’t make you oppressed, lol. You can just stop being right wing at any point.
I’m asking for proof that right wingers are suspended at a higher rate for the same actions. You don’t have anything to prove that, so you’re just guessing. Why are you interested in a data based field when you can’t demonstrate correlation that removes confounding variables?
Mate when your argument relies on comparing oppressed groups in society that are oppressed
Either a correlation matters or it doesn't, how sorry you feel for a group plays no scientific role.
You being right wing doesn’t make you oppressed, lol. You can just stop being right wing at any point.
People can flip their deepseated beliefs like a light switch. Sounds scientific to me!
I’m asking for proof that right wingers are suspended at a higher rate for the same actions. You don’t have anything to prove that, so you’re just guessing.
I gave it to you. Republicans are suspended at a 5x for the same actions of talking on twitter just like Dems do. What confounding variables are you talking about?
you’re not a serious person
So even though you concede that "Republicans are being suspended more than democrats" and Republicans lean more politically right you don't believe this is proof that there is a bias against right leaning people because Republicans are also "open fascists"?
I am not sure this is your logic because you also state that "open fascist" is a distinct "political party". Presumably a party distinct from Republicans. Not that i've ever heard of them.
I think the onus might be on you to prove that the data doesn't take account of this phenomenon that you refer to (not that i can understand what it is exactly). Since ATM its conjecture and you have the hard data you've asked for
Where did I say republicans are open fascists? I said open fascists would be the most likely to be banned and the most likely to break tos terms, and this wouldn’t constitute unfair or unequal banning. Try rereading
But then what do Republicans have to do open fascists then?
Explaining that one ideology may lead its followers to violate TOS more. If you want things specific to people who aren’t open fascists, AFAIK no democrats are posting QAnon shit which gets bans. Very few dems post about vaccine conspiracies. Etc etc etc. if one political party has a contingent of voters who violate terms of service more, they’re going to be banned more. Y’all just gloss over that part to pretend people who choose to do these things that they know violate TOS are victims
I am not sure you've explained the connection. And your logic is not clear enough to follow. I don't have any more questions
Ok lol
I was just proposing some candidate reasons. Your political journalism article is only relevant to Americans, and there's plenty of other people who live in other places who don't give a rats about it.
Like I said, I never liked twitter in the first place so I'm going to follow anyone who moves to mastodon and let that take over as much of my twitter usage as possible. I might not get off it entirely, but I'd like to try. I personally dislike Elon's consistent over-promise-under-deliver strategy that he applies to the genuinely cool tech his companies develop. So if rolling back my twitter usage means that I see and hear less of/about him then great.
Go ahead, like I said I want people to move off centralized platforms.
Sure, if you completely set aside the fact that a very vocal subset of right-wing discourse is anchored in overt racism, bigotry, misogyny, misinformation, conspiratorial thinking, and at its very worst, downright stochastic terrorism, you can start making absurd arguments about the right being silenced. This propensity to dangerous speech is completely impossible to ignore, given any kind of non-delusional analysis of the MAGA campaign, and of the online communities that have formed around it. If your side of the political spectrum creates disproportionate quantities of this kind of speech, a disproportionate quantity of it will be moderated away, given a sane approach to moderation. Musk is implicitly denying any of this exists through his stance on moderation, and that is terrible news for the state of online discourse.
Anyone can just say the other side is the radical one.
But an indisputable fact is that a gigantic chunk of our new speech platforms are in the hands of the same Sillycon Valley clique that embraces the same values and outlooks of one of the most leftwing/'progressive' areas in the world. As flawed and as part of this clique as Musk may be, their dismay over this shows this is a step toward greater ideological diversity.
> Anyone can just say the other side is the radical one.
No, there is no “both sides” argument to be made here.
One side still refuses to acknowledge the result of a democratic election, and has called for insurrection. One side wants to violate the bodily autonomy and freedom of religion of its citizens and impose a radical interpretation of Christianity onto their lives, with the openly stated goal of criminalizing abortion, denying access to contraception, and forcing religion through public schools. One side wants to end the right to gay marriage, and deny critical healthcare to transgender people, going against recommendations set by all major respectable healthcare associations, and by peer-reviewed research in the field of psychology. One side is openly racist, misogynistic, and bigoted, and refuses any kind of acknowledgment or criticism of this.
These are not ideologies that come from cherry-picked social media posts. These are ideologies that have been amplified to an extreme by central political figures — namely Trump, Mitch McConnell, Marjorie Taylor Green — that have been echoed by their party through their votes, political tactics, and their platform’s stated goal.
The other side is barely suggesting reforms that would make life infinitesimally more equalitarian, but it mostly lacks the unity and decisiveness to make meaningful changes to the system. Coming from Canada, seeing Americans treat their left as if it was some kind of radical entity seems completely ridiculous. Your left is our right. You still are the last first-world country without a functioning public healthcare system. You still have terrible economical barriers to higher education. You still have a system that is built to keep the rich rich, and keep the poor poor. Your left has been unable to meaningfully address these issues partly because of infighting and because of barriers set by the right.
Both sides are not playing the same game. One is playing a dangerous game that can end democracy if left unchecked.
One side still refuses to acknowledge the result of a democratic election
Like the 2000 election people still say was stolen by Bush II and the SC. And the 2016 election which is the result of Russia 'hacking' the election!
One side wants to violate the bodily autonomy and freedom of religion of its citizens and impose a radical interpretation of social justice onto their lives
Like how the Left wants to ban everything from large sodas, to plastic bags, to what you are allowed to eat, to the straws you get to use, and the cars you drive, to choosing who you work with and work for, prescribing a specific way to have sex, restricting your rights to self defense, to in certain countries banning men from getting private paternity tests and forcing them into 18 years of servitude for a child that isn't theirs. To robbing you of opportunities because you are not the right skin color or sex. I can literally go on forever listing the ways the Left dictates how you should live your life.
These are not ideologies that come from cherry-picked social media posts. These are ideologies that have been amplified to an extreme by central political figures — namely Biden, Nancy Pelosi , AOC — that have been echoed by their party through their votes, political tactics, and their platform’s stated goal.
The other side is barely suggesting reforms that would make life infinitesimally more equalitarian, but it mostly lacks the unity and decisiveness to make meaningful changes to the system. Coming from the world outside of 21st century Western urban areas, seeing Americans treat their right as if it was some kind of radical entity seems completely ridiculous. Your right is our left.
I don't know where this meme came from that the Left is some outcast ideology in America but its not remotely true for anyone who uses their brain for a few seconds. For one thing theres already tons of Leftwingers on this popular American site. Far more than conservatives. A typical San Franciscan Leftist isn't all that much more rightwing than a London or Parisian one. at least from a social justice perspective in fact they may be even more strident given a lot of this type of thought originates from American academia. The MSM in America and Europe parrot the same globalist neoliberal/left line. If you watch mainstream news in America the 'far right' is brought up as a point of concern far more than the 'far left'. Just put the term into google and you will see it is used in news stories far more often.
Claiming MSNBC/HUFFPO are biblethumping crossburners compared to their European counterparts just makes you look silly..
You still are the last first-world country without a functioning public healthcare system.
You're all over the place. We're talking about twitter and moderation and you want to open up a debate about healthcare.
Both sides are not playing the same game. One is playing a dangerous game that can end democracy if left unchecked.
We must restrict speech (from the other side) and delegitimize every election our opponents win while claiming they do it to us for democracy!
lmao
[deleted]
From an user standpoint, a lot of the people that I followed (especially in scientific communities) are less active (or all together off the platform). The only value of twitter (for me) was the scientific discourse, so recreating that seems like a good goal.
I agree. Twitter is awful for scientific discourse by its technical nature let alone the political noise. Which is why it puzzles me why some people use it for that purpose let alone some petty political dislike of Musk being a big factor over all the consistent relevant negatives that have been present for years.
Yea, twitter was a poor platform for scientific discourse (honestly it's not a great platform for anything other than mediocre memes) I guess it was that way just because people were already on it. I'm hopeful platforms will spring up which provide more fruitful discussions. I'm not sure if mastadon is it, but it seems to be pretty good so far (smaller, but more focused user based, plus decentralization is always appealing for some ML folks who are into the crypto, less control sort of stuff).
It has a more surgical approach to connecting users to content, then, say, Reddit. That's mostly what it has going for it.
From my experience you'll get 2000 initial signups and at the end of the month 55 active users. Twitter is still where it's at.
Was 'Skynet' taken?
Dunno about the name choice? Although I'm aware of sigmoid functions, my (and maybe the average person's) immediate reaction and association is the second sense of sigmoid "of, relating to, or being the sigmoid colon". In other words, full of shit and hot air...
Why can’t it be both?
Hey while your at it create a new Facebook, twitch, Washington Post, Amazon and ticktock. The irony is musk hasn't even done anything to how it works yet and this knee jerk reaction is spreading like a cancer. It's definitely cringe.
What do you mean by "right now things seem kind of bleak for the bird app"?
I imagine at least some ML researchers might be interested in communicating via a decentralized protocol, rather than a centralized website fully under the control of an all-powerful, mercurial, micromanagerial, online bully.
Clearly this seems to be the accepted narrative, but could you provide examples for this so called bullying that affects the ability of researchers in the AI space to communicate their ideas on Twitter?
Personally, I'm rather using Musk's site than one run by Twitter's former management, but I'd prefer decentralization over either.
Now thats no way to talk about Parag and all those mods and censors losing their job right now. Show a bit of empathy.
I stayed on after the purchase and it was way less active. It (at least on the sub 10K follower accounts, the big ones are usually bad anyway so I don't follow) has been really quite these past few days. ML twitter had some great discussions, so I think it is worth trying to recreate.
It’s so surreal watching people parrot the influencer checkmark narrative. Out of all the problems in the world, people are choosing to focus on a bunch of privileged social elites needing to pay $8 a month. Talk about missing the random forest for the decision trees.
CurrentMaleficent714 t1_iv2ow34 wrote
Good luck with that.