Musk's X disabled feature for reporting electoral misinformation - researcher
www.reuters.com
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.
  • Teon@kbin.social
    382·
    1 year ago

    Everything on Xitter falls under no longer factual. Why would anyone bother to report anything there.
    It is literally the newest chan. 4chan, 8chan, Xchan.

    • mateomaui@reddthat.comOPEnglish
      327·
      1 year ago

      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.

      • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
        37·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • mateomaui@reddthat.comOPEnglish
          312·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • bane_killgrind@kbin.social
            5·
            1 year ago

            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”

        • mateomaui@reddthat.comOPEnglish
          212·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • AssPennies@lemmy.world
            8·
            1 year ago

            how many credible people can I think of on Lemmy?

            Nobody’s arguing there are credible people here on lemmy, that’s a strawman you’ve set up.

            • mateomaui@reddthat.comOPEnglish
              19·
              1 year ago

              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.

                • mateomaui@reddthat.comOPEnglish
                  16·
                  1 year ago

                  Hey, fucktard, you can always block me if you can’t handle it. I block annoying people on here too, it’s really no big deal.

                  Apparently you cannot read, because I’ve expressly said under this post that it’s a dumpster fire, so obviously I don’t “like it so much”, dumbass.

                  What I’m arguing against, if you’re capable of removing your head from your colon long enough to comprehend something, is the clear assertion made here

                  that anyone who has a presence on Twitter has no credibility. TruthSocial? Sure I’ll agree with that, but it’s ignorant and dismissive of all the upstanding people who were on Twitter before Elon took over, and who actually have a loyal following or are part of communities that they chose not to ditch to go somewhere else.

                  I’m pretty sure for all us random nobodies, including you, it was no big deal to switch, but that’s not actually a valid reason to malign everyone still on twitter as having zero credibility.

                  Fuck off if you don’t like it. You don’t have to endure my presence, asswipe. The block button is right there for you to use, just like on Twitter.

    • mateomaui@reddthat.comOPEnglish
      72·
      1 year ago

      True, I was thinking about whether or not any of it matters when things that do get reported are rarely if ever acted upon. Although the EU recently put him on notice that he’s still bound by their laws even if he backed out of the separate codes of practice other social media have agreed to. We’ll just have to see what happens.