Writes Chris Hayes, in "Why I Want Twitter to Live" (NYT).
1. Thanks to Hayes for explaining the "Let that sink in" joke so clearly. I nearly lost my mind trying to listen to Scott Adams explain it as a reference to the expression "Everything but the kitchen sink." And it wasn't even a kitchen sink, Scott. It was a bathroom sink.
2. I nearly lost my mind, but, unlike Chris Hayes, I do not know the path to madness from experience. I wonder what's happened to poor Chris over the years.
3. The hockey stick graph of global warming pops up. Isn't it great that Nature isn't an "attention addict"? I mean, it's bad enough — or good enough — as it is, with the storms and the heat waves and lightning and so forth. But as long as I'm talking about Chris Haye's metaphors...
4. "Deep in the bowels" — somehow Hayes sounds jealous. The fact is Elon Musk is great at doing quick tweets that interact with other users, and it isn't clear that this consumes "inordinate" time. Seeing how Twitter is flowing along is something he needs to do, and not a distraction. While in there — in the bowels?! — he may easily dash off replies. Some people write fast. Reading/thinking/writing — it's all one flash.
5. Hayes goes on to express dismay that one man is "reigning" over what was once a "collective" in keeping with the "utopian vision of its earliest builders
and users" of the internet. "Because we’ve had it before," he says, it's possible to somehow return to "a
collective digital life." But before Musk took over, Twitter had declined into suppression and heavily skewed censorship. He's demonstrated an intent to restore freedom and inclusivity. Is that what Hayes is really worried about — the loss of the assistance of the faceless censors who ruled in the pre-Musk era?
Posts
41 comments:
"I wonder what's happened to poor Chris over the years."
Likely he has not ventured out of the NYC/DC/Coastie bubble. His writing and speaking (over the years) show no knowledge of the rest of the U.S.
Rachel Maddow lite is mad...
Yep. That's what he's worried about.
Musk's definition of freedom makes Chris feel unsafe in his twitter safety silo. Too many ickey proles out there, and they seem to LIKE this crazy Musk guy, who we can't seem to control.
And there are so MANY of them. He knows people who cry until they shake when they think about it. The struggle is real for this Brown graduate.
Kitchen sinks are too large to carry around as props. Thus the bathroom sink.
Musk has made clear that the banning of Babylon Bee "for spreading misinformation using satire" was the last straw, or one of the last straws, causing him to decide to buy Twitter. He is a big fan, has been interviewed by them, and called them after their banning. Hopefully the Twitter Twit who banned them is now on suicide watch for their own protection.
The high-falutin' verbiage is to cover that Twitter, run at a loss for years, used to be a clubhouse for Hayes and his ilk, and it no longer is.
Musk is "obsessed" with tweeting. Hayes of course reads all of Musk's tweets.
Like the Trump-obsessed, the Musk-obsessed Hayes doth protest too much.
Twitter got me through boring conference calls with people who like to hear themselves talk. Zoom & Teams made it harder. but doable. ;-)
Just suppress that snorting laugh over a meme.
On yesterday's thread about Twitter, my fellow commenter Mark and I discussed his report that -- only since Musk bought Twitter -- there is a brand-new phenomenon of links to bootlegged movies.
I don't know if Mark saw my final responses, so I offer them again here today.
For about 14 years, I have been writing a blog about the movie Dirty Dancing, where I post a lot of YouTube videos.
Since I monitor all of YouTube's videos about that one movie, I know that practically every day there are links to bootleg copies of it. However, any such link is removed within a couple of days. I assume that the movie's owners complain immediately to YouTube about copywrite violations, and so YouTube removes those links promptly.
I must assume (because I do not use Twitter) that the same problem has been happening at Twitter for many, many years. Links to bootleg movies are posted at Twitter, but they are removed within a couple of days because of copywrite violations.
I assume that this phenomenon has not changed at all since Musk bought Twitter.
However, if Mark insists that links to bootlegged movies have occurred only since Musk bought Twitter, then I would be interested in Mark's confirmation and also in his explanation for this brand-new phenomenon.
Ann, you've done a good job curating the musings of pundits, using their Doctorates in Psychology, to give the world the 'true intentions' of people that scare them stupid.
You've exposed how these self anointed experts are shallow and meaningless.
Is it all in? I’ll bet Chris hears that a lot.
Calling out Musk because it wasn't the Kitchen Sink?
From the crowd that can't define woman? Think Latinx is a race? Printing $Trillions but cant find any influence on inflation? Yes they really are that lacking in self awareness.
Just to use an anecdote to expose they way these supposedly informed people really are.
Our Daughters family just moved into a spec house. Bought in the final stages, the plumbing was done. In their kitchen they have a modified laundry sink. So like gender and race...its fluid.
"Mr. Musk bought Twitter because he’s a Twitter addict and, more specifically, an extremely online attention addict."
There are so many people who just cannot argue in good faith. This is just another one.
Musk knows he is losing billions on this deal and he has been explicit about what he is trying to do.
But the leftists just cannot be honest about what their disagreement with Musk really is.
Compare and contrast ...
Elon Musk is active on Twitter.
Elon Musk drives a Tesla.
Thomas Edison used electric light bulbs.
Mike S - sort of OT - I used to monitor YouTube for Viral "Bernie Millionaires and Billionaires" video. These were videos of Bernie saying, out loud, often, in his own words...over and over ... "MILLIONAIRE AND BILLIONAIRES" ...
These youtube videos were all disappeared as soon as it became known that Bernie himself was a millionaire.
To call Musk a Twitter addict is not only an effort to dismiss what Musk is saying on his tweets, it also circuitously calls into question Musk’s competence. Link to short clip I hope drives home my point
Which leads to the question- What is to be done with an incompetent owner?
We’re watching an attempt to create a narrative. Safely and effectively.
You have to remember that the number one goal of democrats is to gain more power. Whenever they get elected their goal is to use that power to get more power. That is the first principle.
They used to control the flow of information and now........they don't.
I'd be mad too!
On his first day at Twitter he hauled around a bathroom sink to make an obscure, very online joke likely poking fun at a certain earnest kind of Twitter user (usually a liberal) who posts something appalling but also banal and says, 'Let that sink in.'
That is really, really, really weird. It's so precise, and yet so far from what anyone else is thinking. "Everything but the kitchen sink" seems to be closer to the the possible meaning -- and it's what occurred to me on seeing the photo. Perhaps the better explanation (if we have to explain it) is that it was an absurdist juxtaposition or non-sequitur combined with the idea "Elon -- cleaning house and getting down to business, in a way very different from how he usually does business."
There are a lot of problems with billionaires and their power, but the ability to cut through collectively imposed consensus and the restrictions of political correctness and the hive mind is not a bad thing. At this point aren't we skeptical of "utopian visions" as masks for the imposition of power? Ours is an age of oligarchies posing as democracies. Maybe that's not so new, but there's more skepticism now.
When I want Chris Hayes' take on something, I'll tell him what it should be. Until then, he should be seen and not heard, like the child he is.
Liberals must always control everyone else.
It's what they do.
It's why they must be destroyed root and branch...
Mr. Musk bought Twitter because he’s a Twitter addict and, more specifically, an extremely online attention addict.
The reporter has NO insight into Musk's motives.
I wonder how much money Musk lost in crypto-currency?
Dude1394 said...
You have to remember that the number one goal of democrats is to gain more power. Whenever they get elected their goal is to use that power to get more power. That is the first principle.
It is not just democrats. You cannot leave out Romney wing Republicans.
Their goal is to maintain corporate globalist control over the system.
The free trade with China open borders amnesty wing of the Republican party is very active here as well.
Twitter seemed to have become very feudal with a connected few granted leave where the "lesser" would be beheaded by roving censor "bots". Musk has quite possibly started a renaissance of Twitter. Of course, the oppressive church of the Woke ideologists foretell "hell on earth" if the peasants gain rights to challenge the 'elite'.
Chris Hayes has been insane for a long time. He’s the perfect barometer for the Left.
Has Mark been around since he got called on his bullshit?
Chris hasn't realized in all these years that the glasses do nothing for his look. Why trust him about anything else?
For people who worship money, the left can be surprisingly dumb when it comes to money.
Twitter has been a shit stock for years. It's underperformed the S&P 500 since its IPO. Profitability has been elusive. Growth has been stagnant.
While (obviously) Musk hopes he can make a lot of money off his purchase, to me this doesn't resemble a corporate raid. It's more like one of those fun investments rich people make because they have the money and can have fun with it.
Like a rich guy buying a baseball team or a football team, or funding a movie or a play. Whenever you buy anything, you do so because the thing you are buying is more important to you than the money.
Musk enjoys Twitter, he wants to help it survive and thrive, so he burned some of his billions buying the company. I don't think he was motivated by greed at all! If anything, to me his little greed monster popped up when he tried to welch on the deal because he overpaid for the company.
He was motivated by things like "love" and "fun." He loves fame, sure, and notoriety. But I suspect he genuinely loves Twitter and wants it to thrive. (Just like Chris Hayes?!)
“ Calling out Musk because it wasn't the Kitchen Sink? ”
No. I’m criticizing Scott Adams
So Musk spends $44 billion to buy a company, but he's spending too much time on it? Really?
I think when you own one of largest social media companies in the world, you'd want to "Tweet" to tell people how you're managing the company, changing things and explaining why the critics are wrong. Oh, and maybe enjoying yourself. That's not same (as say) an underemployed writer spending hours each day tweeting to his friends and calling Trump a fascist.
Wasn't that Trump's problem too? He was addicted to attention on twitter. And then, his liberal/leftwing friends were so concerned about his well being and unproductive time-wasting, they got Twitter, Facebook, and every social media company to ban him.
Good thing they were so concerned. I think Hayes is concerned about Musk in the same way.
What I've noticed in my own feed is that I'm seeing a LOT more content from Lefties than I used to see. I've not seen it talked about but I get the impression that Twitter is removing silos that kept people in their own echo chambers. If I'm correct then I think that is an absolutely terrific thing; I'm sure this would not make Chris Hayes happy.
NYT brays truth through projection.
Many companies have given up on Twitter.
If you were around in the 1960s and radicalized, is it strange to you now that corporations are leading the social revolution?
"I get the impression that Twitter is removing silos that kept people in their own echo chambers. "
Lefties should be ecstatic. Surely the power of their ideas will swell their ranks…
The "Hockey" was, and still is, BS. In the time period it covers, it has been considerably hotter than now and considerably colder. Dr. Mann simply regressed a line through all the data and claimed that was the actual experience. To get the blade part of the data, he changed the evaluation methodology. Also based on independent review of the data assumed to be associated with the hockey stick, it appears that the data prior to the inflection has been adjusted downward and the data after the inflection upward.
There is reason to believe that we are still climbing up out of the "Little Ice Age" that occurred about 10-12,000 years ago. There is no money in that research, however.
Original Mike, no one ever proved my claim was bullshit. It was just furiously demanded that I prove my claim.
Given the pass you give to election deniers, I am not wasting my time proving what I have seen via multiple sources.
"Based on Kermode's review, I get the impression that Del Toro determined that previous cinematic Pinocchios were right wing — that "populist litany of instructional morals" is practically Jordan's Peterson's "12 Rules for Life" — and strained to go left somehow... through chaos?"
Interesting. Peterson is sort of obsessed about the Pinocchio story and talks about it all the time. Its one of his Jungian archetype stories.
"It was just furiously demanded that I prove my claim."
Mike S's question seemed pretty polite and low-key to me
"Given the pass you give to election deniers,…"
When did I do that? What are you talking about?
Hayes goes on to express dismay that one man is "reigning" over what was once a "collective" in keeping with the "utopian vision of its earliest builders and users" of the internet.
Musk has asked the users of Twitter to vote on stuff.
You'd think a socialist or a democrat or a liberal or an NYT reader might notice that shit.
Is that what Hayes is really worried about — the loss of the assistance of the faceless censors who ruled in the pre-Musk era?
Yes, it is
Post a Comment