[gocard14]

Eh, who knows?

On the one hand, Musk has done amazing things in starting 2 separate and widely disparate pioneering companies in Tesla and SpaceX. Yes he’s not doing the engineering but getting the capital, taking the leap, and running successfully is a big deal. 

On the other hand, 

I’m a doc, and the classic doc mistake in life is to assume that being smart in your field means you’re smart in everything. Hence a lot of docs are financial wrecks from poor investment. We see this all the time in politics. Being a good businessman does not a good politician make. 

I see a bit of this in Musk. Being a good entrepreneur in engineering heavy firms may or may not translate to social media. His very present, hype generating style has served Tesla well in the past, but is now alienating some of the very people his company should be courting. In CA for example, it is rapidly becoming less “cool” to buy a Tesla. Given how social media is 1% engineering and 99% social/cool/network effects, it doesn’t take much to render a platform less worthwhile.  For example, I am heavily bearish on Facebook’s core business. I know no heavy users under the age of 40. 

TLDR, my crystal ball is cloudy, but i would sell my twitter shares.

[gocard14]

Eh, who knows?

On the one hand, Musk has done amazing things in starting 2 separate and widely disparate pioneering companies in Tesla and SpaceX. Yes he’s not doing the engineering but getting the capital, taking the leap, and running successfully is a big deal. 

On the other hand, 

I’m a doc, and the classic doc mistake in life is to assume that being smart in your field means you’re smart in everything. Hence a lot of docs are financial wrecks from poor investment. We see this all the time in politics. Being a good businessman does not a good politician make. 

I see a bit of this in Musk. Being a good entrepreneur in engineering heavy firms may or may not translate to social media. His very present, hype generating style has served Tesla well in the past, but is now alienating some of the very people his company should be courting. In CA for example, it is rapidly becoming less “cool” to buy a Tesla. Given how social media is 1% engineering and 99% social/cool/network effects, it doesn’t take much to render a platform less worthwhile.  For example, I am heavily bearish on Facebook’s core business. I know no heavy users under the age of 40. 

TLDR, my crystal ball is cloudy, but i would sell my twitter shares.

[Canalejas]

Fun technicality: Elon became chairman of Tesla a year after the company's founding. Five years later, it took a legal settlement for the founders to agree to call him a co-founder.

[Canalejas]

Fun technicality: Elon became chairman of Tesla a year after the company's founding. Five years later, it took a legal settlement for the founders to agree to call him a co-founder.

[cardcrimson]

Okay. Ex-basketball player from Stanford tweets something. Therefore it's okay to post said tweet on a Stanford sports board and launch a diatribe against someone who has nothing to do with Stanford or sports.

Ignoring for a moment the political leanings of both the former player and the OP, why is this even relevant on the Cardboard? Why is it okay?

I do find it extremely ironic that the tweeter issues a warning about the platform while using it to get her message out and that she has the little blue check mark of approval ridiculed by the OP.

[cardcrimson]

Okay. Ex-basketball player from Stanford tweets something. Therefore it's okay to post said tweet on a Stanford sports board and launch a diatribe against someone who has nothing to do with Stanford or sports.

Ignoring for a moment the political leanings of both the former player and the OP, why is this even relevant on the Cardboard? Why is it okay?

I do find it extremely ironic that the tweeter issues a warning about the platform while using it to get her message out and that she has the little blue check mark of approval ridiculed by the OP.

[Canalejas]

There was a thread earlier discussing Kate Starbird's current role in studying disinformation campaigns.  

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=23540  

Just in case anyone was wondering about her bona fides.

[Canalejas]

There was a thread earlier discussing Kate Starbird's current role in studying disinformation campaigns.  

https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=23540  

Just in case anyone was wondering about her bona fides.

[OutsiderFan]

Speculation among SV types is that Musk would like to turn Twitter into the US/Western equivalent of China's WeChat but with less heavy-handed government control.  If that happens it will be a very profitable for him and Twitters investor.  Of course others are also trying ...

Can I assume that most folks here know the WeChat model?

Twitter also has a reputation for paying well above market rate - Not to say that excuses good WARN/Lay-Off practices but it's not surprising that a take-over would be followed by a restructuring for several reasons.  Being let go will ALWAYS be personal to the person laid off (and I've been one of them in the past) but it would be shocking if ANY acquiring entity didn't restructure/refocus/reduce spend.  Hopefully they've banked some of those Twitter dollars.

I have no idea what WeChat is, or its model. Please explain.

[OutsiderFan]

Speculation among SV types is that Musk would like to turn Twitter into the US/Western equivalent of China's WeChat but with less heavy-handed government control.  If that happens it will be a very profitable for him and Twitters investor.  Of course others are also trying ...

Can I assume that most folks here know the WeChat model?

Twitter also has a reputation for paying well above market rate - Not to say that excuses good WARN/Lay-Off practices but it's not surprising that a take-over would be followed by a restructuring for several reasons.  Being let go will ALWAYS be personal to the person laid off (and I've been one of them in the past) but it would be shocking if ANY acquiring entity didn't restructure/refocus/reduce spend.  Hopefully they've banked some of those Twitter dollars.

I have no idea what WeChat is, or its model. Please explain.

[cctop]

I have no idea what WeChat is, or its model. Please explain.

WeChat is a messaging, social media, & payment app popular in China and among Chinese people around the world.

Calling it "popular" actually understates the case.  WeChat is as close to an everything app as anyone has yet achieved.

When I was in Beijing four years ago it was often hard to use cash outside of major stores and restaurants. Street vendors all had printed QR codes, and we would pay using WeChat on our cell phones.

The app evidently is heavily surveilled and censored by the Chinese government, but at this point WeChat is so ubiquitous in China that it's hard to avoid using it.

[cctop]

I have no idea what WeChat is, or its model. Please explain.

WeChat is a messaging, social media, & payment app popular in China and among Chinese people around the world.

Calling it "popular" actually understates the case.  WeChat is as close to an everything app as anyone has yet achieved.

When I was in Beijing four years ago it was often hard to use cash outside of major stores and restaurants. Street vendors all had printed QR codes, and we would pay using WeChat on our cell phones.

The app evidently is heavily surveilled and censored by the Chinese government, but at this point WeChat is so ubiquitous in China that it's hard to avoid using it.

[yvonne]

Kate's work centers around disinformation on the web and elsewhere on the internet. It tracks messages' origin and who passes them along. If she says to be careful, it's probably because her group has already seen certain activity in the deep web.

---

also, she's probably not talking about just Twitter.

[yvonne]

Kate's work centers around disinformation on the web and elsewhere on the internet. It tracks messages' origin and who passes them along. If she says to be careful, it's probably because her group has already seen certain activity in the deep web.

---

also, she's probably not talking about just Twitter.

[81alum]

Okay. Ex-basketball player from Stanford tweets something. Therefore it's okay to post said tweet on a Stanford sports board and launch a diatribe against someone who has nothing to do with Stanford or sports.

Ignoring for a moment the political leanings of both the former player and the OP, why is this even relevant on the Cardboard? Why is it okay?

I do find it extremely ironic that the tweeter issues a warning about the platform while using it to get her message out and that she has the little blue check mark of approval ridiculed by the OP.

Keep in mind that this ex-basketball player went on to earn a doctorate in "Technology, Media, and Society," was hired in an extremely competitive search by a major research university, went on to be one of the rare assistant professors there to earn tenure, after earning tenure went on to found a major research group on "Emerging Capacities of Mass Participation" and is the co founder of the UW "Center for an Informed Public," and has published 48 peer reviewed articles in her young career--and none of the reviewers of course knew she was a former Stanford basketball star. 

Yes, as one of the nation's top experts on the way disinformation spreads on social media, it is indeed ironic that she sometimes uses social media to spread information.

But you are probably right that this is not relevant to the Cardboard, anymore than the thread on Ukraine.  I, however, am really proud that our basketball program produced this outstanding individual.

[81alum]

Okay. Ex-basketball player from Stanford tweets something. Therefore it's okay to post said tweet on a Stanford sports board and launch a diatribe against someone who has nothing to do with Stanford or sports.

Ignoring for a moment the political leanings of both the former player and the OP, why is this even relevant on the Cardboard? Why is it okay?

I do find it extremely ironic that the tweeter issues a warning about the platform while using it to get her message out and that she has the little blue check mark of approval ridiculed by the OP.

Keep in mind that this ex-basketball player went on to earn a doctorate in "Technology, Media, and Society," was hired in an extremely competitive search by a major research university, went on to be one of the rare assistant professors there to earn tenure, after earning tenure went on to found a major research group on "Emerging Capacities of Mass Participation" and is the co founder of the UW "Center for an Informed Public," and has published 48 peer reviewed articles in her young career--and none of the reviewers of course knew she was a former Stanford basketball star. 

Yes, as one of the nation's top experts on the way disinformation spreads on social media, it is indeed ironic that she sometimes uses social media to spread information.

But you are probably right that this is not relevant to the Cardboard, anymore than the thread on Ukraine.  I, however, am really proud that our basketball program produced this outstanding individual.

[old spanish trail]

Yes, thanks for thread, Yvonne.

[old spanish trail]

Yes, thanks for thread, Yvonne.

[dabigv13]

Within a year or two I think twitter will go the way of MySpace. Something else will come along now that Elon is alienating his core userbase. Good thing Elon has the money to burn.

Been a funny day on twitter at least.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/RealNeilC/status/158...PmMdMTwVrA[/tweet]

[dabigv13]

Within a year or two I think twitter will go the way of MySpace. Something else will come along now that Elon is alienating his core userbase. Good thing Elon has the money to burn.

Been a funny day on twitter at least.

[Tweet]
https://twitter.com/RealNeilC/status/158...PmMdMTwVrA[/tweet]

[BostonCard]

I had to laugh at this…

[tweet]https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1588714014749904896?s=46&t=QsGkxPhii8JIQtJhRLUdPQ[/tweet]

Seen, where else, but on twitter.

BC

---

---

also, she's probably not talking about just Twitter.

That’s the thing the OP missed. Dr. Starbird was talking about concerted attempts by American enemies to foster division (which, ironically, the OP plays right into). Our poster then conflates this with his personal feelings about Twitter’s new owner, which, as I said, is neither here nor there. It’s not like misinformation on Twitter started last Friday.  And while I have concerns that his “light touch” approach to content moderation will make things worse in the long run, as I posted earlier, nothing has changed from before he owned the company, except that maybe some people feel newly emboldened to give into their worst instincts.  But none of that has anything to do with attempts to foment discontent between now and Election Day.

BC

[BostonCard]

I had to laugh at this…

[tweet]https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1588714014749904896?s=46&t=QsGkxPhii8JIQtJhRLUdPQ[/tweet]

Seen, where else, but on twitter.

BC

---

---

also, she's probably not talking about just Twitter.

That’s the thing the OP missed. Dr. Starbird was talking about concerted attempts by American enemies to foster division (which, ironically, the OP plays right into). Our poster then conflates this with his personal feelings about Twitter’s new owner, which, as I said, is neither here nor there. It’s not like misinformation on Twitter started last Friday.  And while I have concerns that his “light touch” approach to content moderation will make things worse in the long run, as I posted earlier, nothing has changed from before he owned the company, except that maybe some people feel newly emboldened to give into their worst instincts.  But none of that has anything to do with attempts to foment discontent between now and Election Day.

BC

[cardcrimson]

Okay. Ex-basketball player from Stanford tweets something. Therefore it's okay to post said tweet on a Stanford sports board and launch a diatribe against someone who has nothing to do with Stanford or sports.

Ignoring for a moment the political leanings of both the former player and the OP, why is this even relevant on the Cardboard? Why is it okay?

I do find it extremely ironic that the tweeter issues a warning about the platform while using it to get her message out and that she has the little blue check mark of approval ridiculed by the OP.

Keep in mind that this ex-basketball player went on to earn a doctorate in "Technology, Media, and Society," was hired in an extremely competitive search by a major research university, went on to be one of the rare assistant professors there to earn tenure, after earning tenure went on to found a major research group on "Emerging Capacities of Mass Participation" and is the co founder of the UW "Center for an Informed Public," and has published 48 peer reviewed articles in her young career--and none of the reviewers of course knew she was a former Stanford basketball star. 

Yes, as one of the nation's top experts on the way disinformation spreads on social media, it is indeed ironic that she sometimes uses social media to spread information.

But you are probably right that this is not relevant to the Cardboard, anymore than the thread on Ukraine.  I, however, am really proud that our basketball program produced this outstanding individual.

The original post wasn't about Dr Starbird and her accomplishments. It was simply to use her tweet to launch a diatribe against Musk, his purchase of Twitter, and the changes he's making. I again ask, why is this conversation permitted when Musk and Twitter have nothing to do with Stanford and that it's clearly politically motivated? 

And to equate this thread to the one on the war in Ukraine in relevance and importance to the Stanford community, well, in the immortal words of John McEnroe: "You cannot be serious!"

[cardcrimson]

Okay. Ex-basketball player from Stanford tweets something. Therefore it's okay to post said tweet on a Stanford sports board and launch a diatribe against someone who has nothing to do with Stanford or sports.

Ignoring for a moment the political leanings of both the former player and the OP, why is this even relevant on the Cardboard? Why is it okay?

I do find it extremely ironic that the tweeter issues a warning about the platform while using it to get her message out and that she has the little blue check mark of approval ridiculed by the OP.

Keep in mind that this ex-basketball player went on to earn a doctorate in "Technology, Media, and Society," was hired in an extremely competitive search by a major research university, went on to be one of the rare assistant professors there to earn tenure, after earning tenure went on to found a major research group on "Emerging Capacities of Mass Participation" and is the co founder of the UW "Center for an Informed Public," and has published 48 peer reviewed articles in her young career--and none of the reviewers of course knew she was a former Stanford basketball star. 

Yes, as one of the nation's top experts on the way disinformation spreads on social media, it is indeed ironic that she sometimes uses social media to spread information.

But you are probably right that this is not relevant to the Cardboard, anymore than the thread on Ukraine.  I, however, am really proud that our basketball program produced this outstanding individual.

The original post wasn't about Dr Starbird and her accomplishments. It was simply to use her tweet to launch a diatribe against Musk, his purchase of Twitter, and the changes he's making. I again ask, why is this conversation permitted when Musk and Twitter have nothing to do with Stanford and that it's clearly politically motivated? 

And to equate this thread to the one on the war in Ukraine in relevance and importance to the Stanford community, well, in the immortal words of John McEnroe: "You cannot be serious!"

[BostonCard]

To be fair, Musk did enroll, and drop out of, Stanford.  But you and I agree; the connection between Starbird’s caution and Elon Musk is tenuous at best.

BC

[BostonCard]

To be fair, Musk did enroll, and drop out of, Stanford.  But you and I agree; the connection between Starbird’s caution and Elon Musk is tenuous at best.

BC

[lex24]

In an earlier post, I noted that the post (and discussion) relating to Musk and Twitter. is inherently political.  Why?  Because social media in todays world is inherently political. Case in point - Rob Bonta sent a letter today to Tik-Tok, You Tube, Meta, Google and Reddit urging them to “not make the same mistake“ and invoke their moderation policies to stop the “misinformation“ being  spread as the election approaches. (Those are actual quotes. I’m not using scare quotes.)

 This is not offered to question whether or not Banta was right or wrong in delivering the letter.  It is, however, proof positive of the political nature of these social media sites – that not only disseminate information, but arguably control it. Information is power. Simple as that.

[lex24]

In an earlier post, I noted that the post (and discussion) relating to Musk and Twitter. is inherently political.  Why?  Because social media in todays world is inherently political. Case in point - Rob Bonta sent a letter today to Tik-Tok, You Tube, Meta, Google and Reddit urging them to “not make the same mistake“ and invoke their moderation policies to stop the “misinformation“ being  spread as the election approaches. (Those are actual quotes. I’m not using scare quotes.)

 This is not offered to question whether or not Banta was right or wrong in delivering the letter.  It is, however, proof positive of the political nature of these social media sites – that not only disseminate information, but arguably control it. Information is power. Simple as that.

[cardcrimson]

In an earlier post, I noted that the post (and discussion) relating to Musk and Twitter. is inherently political.  Why?  Because social media in todays world is inherently political. Case in point - Rob Bonta sent a letter today to Tik-Tok, You Tube, Meta, Google and Reddit urging them to “not make the same mistake“ and invoke their moderation policies to stop the “misinformation“ being  spread as the election approaches. (Those are actual quotes. I’m not using scare quotes.)

 This is not offered to question whether or not Banta was right or wrong in delivering the letter.  It is, however, proof positive of the political nature of these social media sites – that not only disseminate information, but arguably control it.  Information is power. Simple as that.

Excellent point, Lex. Thanks. I might add, that while information is power, the control of how it is disseminated is power.

---

To be fair, Musk did enroll, and drop out of, Stanford.  But you and I agree; the connection between Starbird’s caution and Elon Musk is tenuous at best.

BC

To be fair, so did McEnroe. . . .

Thanks though!

[cardcrimson]

In an earlier post, I noted that the post (and discussion) relating to Musk and Twitter. is inherently political.  Why?  Because social media in todays world is inherently political. Case in point - Rob Bonta sent a letter today to Tik-Tok, You Tube, Meta, Google and Reddit urging them to “not make the same mistake“ and invoke their moderation policies to stop the “misinformation“ being  spread as the election approaches. (Those are actual quotes. I’m not using scare quotes.)

 This is not offered to question whether or not Banta was right or wrong in delivering the letter.  It is, however, proof positive of the political nature of these social media sites – that not only disseminate information, but arguably control it.  Information is power. Simple as that.

Excellent point, Lex. Thanks. I might add, that while information is power, the control of how it is disseminated is power.

---

To be fair, Musk did enroll, and drop out of, Stanford.  But you and I agree; the connection between Starbird’s caution and Elon Musk is tenuous at best.

BC

To be fair, so did McEnroe. . . .

Thanks though!

[lex24]

Why don't you find a political message board to spew your political views.  Cardboarders are capable of deciding for themselves what sources they deem credible.

Your post "spews" your own political views. So shut the F up.

Ah yes. The reason for the rule….

[lex24]

Why don't you find a political message board to spew your political views.  Cardboarders are capable of deciding for themselves what sources they deem credible.

Your post "spews" your own political views. So shut the F up.

Ah yes. The reason for the rule….

[cardcrimson]

Why don't you find a political message board to spew your political views.  Cardboarders are capable of deciding for themselves what sources they deem credible.

Your post "spews" your own political views. So shut the F up.

Lovely.

[cardcrimson]

Why don't you find a political message board to spew your political views.  Cardboarders are capable of deciding for themselves what sources they deem credible.

Your post "spews" your own political views. So shut the F up.

Lovely.

[lex24]

Why don't you find a political message board to spew your political views.  Cardboarders are capable of deciding for themselves what sources they deem credible.

Your post "spews" your own political views. So shut the F up.

Welcome to CardBoard jail.

LOL.  Nice use of humor when needed!

[lex24]

Why don't you find a political message board to spew your political views.  Cardboarders are capable of deciding for themselves what sources they deem credible.

Your post "spews" your own political views. So shut the F up.

Welcome to CardBoard jail.

LOL.  Nice use of humor when needed!

[cardcrimson]

And why the mods thought this thread should stay open is beyond my comprehension, unless it pushes a narrative they approve. Fair question, isn't it? Or will that get me banned again?

I reported this thread as violating the rules very early on. Surprisingly, I wasn't the first. Those reports were either ignored or dismissed. I'd appreciate some discussion from the Mods how this thread continues to exist and why it remains relevant to Stanford sports.

[cardcrimson]

And why the mods thought this thread should stay open is beyond my comprehension, unless it pushes a narrative they approve. Fair question, isn't it? Or will that get me banned again?

I reported this thread as violating the rules very early on. Surprisingly, I wasn't the first. Those reports were either ignored or dismissed. I'd appreciate some discussion from the Mods how this thread continues to exist and why it remains relevant to Stanford sports.

[CompSci87]

Looks like it is high time to lock it.... and I see admin did so.

[CompSci87]

Looks like it is high time to lock it.... and I see admin did so.