this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
2631 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

59582 readers
3214 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
 

Google has reportedly removed much of Twitter's links from its search results after the social network's owner Elon Musk announced reading tweets would be limited.

Search Engine Roundtable found that Google had removed 52% of Twitter links since the crackdown began last week. Twitter now blocks users who are not logged in and sets limits on reading tweets.

According to Barry Schwartz, Google reported 471 million Twitter URLs as of Friday. But by Monday morning, that number had plummeted to 227 million.

"For normal indexing of these Twitter URLs, it seems like these tweets are dropping out of the sky," Schwartz wrote.

Platformer reported last month that Twitter refused to pay its bill for Google Cloud services.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 101 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Twitter was an important unifying communications tool during the Arab Spring. The Arab spring was a threat to biz as usual in places like Saudi Arabia. The second largest investor in Twitter is Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia killed and dismembered a journalist from the US, more or less in plain sight. Elon is now killing and dismembering Twitter in plain sight to limit its power as a unifying tool that stands as a demonstrable, active threat to capitalism and oligarchs around the world.

Billionaires do favors for other billionaires. It's part of why spez is trying to tank Reddit. Remember how dangerous Reddit was to capitalism's status quo around the time of GME/Robinhood/Antiwork recently.

The specific moment we're in right now is meant to shatter consolidated organizing power on Reddit as we splinter into several smaller alternative platforms (or for some, disconnect entirely). Not saying we shouldn't be in Lemmy, but calling out the larger reality of the moment.

Billionaires do favors for other billionaires.

[–] Dash11@lemmy.world 89 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I like this take, but this is a conspiracy theory take. Change a few words and this would be something regurgitated by Q fanatics.

[–] WimpyWoodchuck@feddit.de 44 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This sounds a lot like Hanlon's razor. "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

Do you really believe that people like spez, Zuckerberg, Musk behave like they do because they want to do favors for other billionaires? Isn't it much more likely that they're just ... disturbed? That they are narcissistic, megalomaniac, maybe idealistic in their own believe. And in being that, they make stupid decisions because they literally work differently than regular folks.

[–] jochem@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yeah, I also seriously doubt there's a big conspiracy happening where ultra rich people are helping each other. Have you looked at those people? Most don't give a fuck about anyone but themselves.

Musk bought Twitter around the time he was fighting with this guy that had the private jet tracker. I think it's more reasonable to believe that Musk bought Twitter just to shut that down and now it's a toy he can play with, where every time he merely touches it, media jumps on it, which feeds his ego massively. And once Twitter is dead, he'll discard it and move on to the next thing. Like a cat playing with its prey.

[–] frumpyfries@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Normally I would tend to agree with you, but look where Musk got his "loans" to buy out Twitter. Saudi Arabia and Russia where big "lenders".

[–] Piers@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I think it’s more reasonable to believe that Musk bought Twitter just to shut that down and now it’s a toy he can play with, where every time he merely touches it, media jumps on it, which feeds his ego massively.

That's definitely true. I think it's also true that the people who financed it were doing so to take advantage of that to their own ends.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The only person in the world you can ever truly know is yourself.

So when I ask myself "If I were spez/zuck/musk why would I do this?"

The answer is usually "because someone gave me a lot of money"

[–] Piers@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't know about Spez but I don't think that's how Musk and Zuck are motivated. The money is a secondary effect of their goal of being "Great Men" in history. Seen through that lens, taking control of the main public square, changing the nature of discussion there (and taking as much credit for it as possible) is an end unto itself for Musk. Especially when you consider that, if he is able to both control and maintain Twitter as the main locus of online discussion, it allows him to try to reshape the wider narrative about the value and importance of his work in general.

[–] queermunist@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not so sure Musk is actually motivated by his own hype, I think that's part of his professional self branding that he relies on to juice the valuation of his companies. Seen through that lens, taking control of the main public square is a way to juice his rep further and make even more money.

I'm skeptical of ascribing immaterial motives to billionaires.

EDIT Oh! Also, I think the reason enshitification has accelerated so much recently is because of high interest rates. It's why Silicon Valley Bank imploded, after all. Companies are scrambling to be profitable after the free investor cash has dried up. It's not good enough to be maybe profitable in an undefined future, they need to be profitable now so they can justify investment. The bubble is deflating - though fortunately, it seems like it's going to be a soft landing instead of a pop.

[–] LeZero@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

While I don't think there is a specific conspiracy, I do believe that the upper classes enforce class interest and still have a strong sense of class solidarity, something they worked very hard (through their hegemonic control of the media) to excise from the societies they inhabit and predate upon.

Someone like Rupert Murdoch won't necessarily take action on behalf of specific individuals, but he will fight tooth and nail for the privileges of his fellow billionaires.

[–] nparkinglot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m glad I’m not the only person thinking about this. I had no idea about the Saudis owning Twitter like that. All decisions made by the rich are for Money^TM^. Usually it’s Money^TM^ in either the form of growth (profit, short term) or investment (power, stability, long term). Some of spezs actions are easily explained by Money^TM^ when you take into account LLMs mining reddit. But that does not explain being so insanely hardline with their API. There was absolutely a resolution to that that was profitable and didn’t continue giving away “their” information for free. This is where I think a 3rd Money^TM^ comes into play: existential investments. These are actions they take to ensure the other two forms of Money^TM^ continue to function the way they want them to. Such as tanking the two most significant online tools for organizing collective action against them.

[–] Strangle@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Decisions at that level are made for power. Sometimes money is part of that

[–] nparkinglot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

I mean, yes, but I think “sometimes” really underestimates role money plays in a capitalist world. Money is power. People who tell you otherwise are trying to sell you something.

[–] shinjiikarus@mylem.eu 13 points 1 year ago

While I like both takes, I don’t think even the dumbest billionaire or government wouldn’t recognize the value one centralized tool has. It would have been sufficient to control both Twitter and Reddit, moderate the hell out of topics they don’t like and put them offline in crucial moments. Destroying them without a clear, centralized alternative isn’t really sensible.

I personally expected the Reddit IPO to be the end of any “subversive investment advice”, that might have been on Reddit.

[–] Varixable@lemmy.fmhy.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed. It's no coincidence that both Twitter and Reddit are shitting the bed at the same time.

Elon is pretty clearly an actual idiot, and has managed to get by thus far by just having a seemingly endless supply of fuck you money, but this is just capitalism doing the Predator bicep meme with foreign oligarchs to consolidate power.

[–] Dash11@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, it sort of is. Unless the fed is involved in this billionaire conspiracy also (which the nature of conspiracy theories will undoubtedly have someone saying of course the fed is in on it with the billionaires).

The simple answer really does make the most sense here. Interest rates are on the rise, and platforms like twitter and reddit have been around for a very long time and none of the venture capital backing them has ever turned a real profit despite the money being pumped into them. Investors will pull out money from the riskiest items first when interest rates rise, and the riskiest items are social media platforms that haven't demonstrated monetization potential even after a decade of use and monolithic control within their spaces. If a link aggregator like Reddit, which is really the only major player in its brand of social media can't turn a profit with basically no competition why would you continue supporting it?

[–] Varixable@lemmy.fmhy.ml 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Great point, and I do think you're right because that is the most sensible answer to what the motives behind these recent decisions are. There has been a nonstop flow of cheap debt for years that the fed is just now tightening up on.

But these business decisions also happen to align with the interests of deep pocketed bad actors. The why's of that are conspiracy theories.

[–] ours@lemmy.film 2 points 1 year ago

Saudi Arabia murdered Khashoggi because he was defying their army of Twitter trolls with a network of volonteers he bankrolled.