167
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Hubi@feddit.de 49 points 1 year ago

In all honesty, the lawful evil Zucc is better than the chaotic evil Musk, at least for now.

[-] MashingBundle@lemmy.fmhy.ml 39 points 1 year ago

Zucc is a greedy asshole, but I think he knows when to sit back, and let the smarter people make decisions.

Musk is an arrogant, insufferable fuck. Epitome of a know-it-all.

[-] Ranessin@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Zucc is a greedy asshole, but I think he knows when to sit back, and let the smarter people make decisions.

Eh, the whole Metaverse fiasco. But he's at least not an outspoken Fascist, which makes him somewhat good in today's dystopian world.

[-] shinjiikarus@mylem.eu 14 points 1 year ago

Which makes him even more dangerous. In my personal world all centralized social networks would be put into Musk’s hand and Zucc behind bars for every genocide, election sway and dictator Facebook has enabled and will enable in the future.

[-] MysticKetchup@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

The issue is that Twitter, even with Musk hammering nails into it, is still a better social media than Threads. Threads has no way to even limit your timeline to only people you follow or view posts in reverse chronological order. It's all algorithm and Zuck shoving brands in your face.

Plus Twitter remains one of the last few major havens for NSFW socials, and I doubt Threads will be any more lenient than Instagram's strict rules.

I'm just really hoping that Mastodon gets more traction, but it feels like the realistic version of David vs Goliath where the little guy gets squashed.

[-] T156@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

At the same time, with Twitter in its current state, it is basically unusable for social media, since your average account is limited to about 300 - 600 requests, which includes every single interaction and loading of all posts you see.

[-] sudneo@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago

I think it's important to realist that it's not at all about the owner to be evil or benevolent. It is all about what structural and economic incentives exist. A for-profit corporation based on the business model of advertisement is structurally incompatible with some objectives that I - as a netizen - want to achieve (freedom, privacy).

This is also why I don't agree with those of "it's a win for decentralized" or "it will bring users". For me decentralization and other properties (e.g. OpenSource code) are only some necessary conditions to achieve the above abstract and ideological goals.

[-] MashingBundle@lemmy.fmhy.ml 14 points 1 year ago

Pitting two piles of shit against each other does not make the winner any better.

[-] Hubi@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

Not better, but if one of them goes down it's still a win in my book.

[-] RooRLoord420@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I don't know. If we're comparing shit, some shit is better than other shit. We don't see farmers fertilizing their fields with duck shit. Nah. They use the good shit - bull shit.

[-] animist@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago

I hope they destroy each other

this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2023
167 points (94.7% liked)

Technology

59161 readers
2100 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS