Bolle

@AnnCoulter You mean like California's fuel tax.

The only “tax” you pay voluntarily.

@EWErickson So Erick must believe Elon should be fired too, along with any other federal employee that expresses a political message on the job. I'm sure he is consistent with this view.

No Supreme Court Justice expressed a strong political opinion. His wife did. But these federal employees did express a political message on the job and should be fired.

@phl43 Musk promised a public square, he has turned it into his own private square with paid VIP seats.

I'd like to offer some thoughts about Twitter in the Musk era, the other place and where things are going. I'm mostly pessimistic about the whole thing, but I think there is plenty of blame to go around. What I liked the most about Twitter is basically that it had a great equalizing effect: not only did it allow you to have access to the thoughts of various "opinion-makers", such as journalists, academics, businessmen and government officials, in a way that was previously impossible to ordinary people, but it also made it possible for you to interact with them and, if you had something interesting to say, they would eventually notice and you could gain influence that would have been unimaginable to anyone without major institutional backing in the past. Speaking only about myself, while I'm obviously not a very important person and I'm mostly irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, after a few years on this website I have still achieved a degree of influence, such as it is, that I could never have dreamed of in the pre-Twitter era. I'm followed by and regularly interact with not only thousands of prominent academics and journalists, but also many businessmen and government officials in multiple countries, including at the highest level. Sometimes I think about the kind of people who follow me or subscribe to my Substack and I can scarcely believe it. I don't think I'm fooling myself in thinking that, at the elite level at least, I have more or less the kind of influence that a columnist at a major newspaper had in the pre-Internet era. And frankly that's kind of insane when you think about it, because at the end of the day, I'm just a random person who writes about stuff he's interested in and there is no reason why anyone should read anything I write. In the pre-Internet era, someone like me would have had no business having that kind of influence, again however insignificant it may be in the grand scheme of things. Obviously, it has also allowed all sorts of morons, grifters and crazies to become much more influential than I will ever be and I think that's bad for society, but for someone like me the erosion of traditional gatekeeping it has made possible has objectively been great. Another thing I love about Twitter is that through it I've met all sorts of people whose existence I wouldn't even have been aware of without it. Most of them are not famous, but they're still very interesting. I know people think that debating on Twitter is a waste of time, and I agree that it often is, but I've nevertheless been able to get a lot out of it and I definitely think it has improved my thinking on a lot of issues. There are many things I don't like about the changes Musk introduced since it took control of Twitter. First, I think boosting the tweets/replies of people who pay for a subscription is a terrible idea, because it goes against the idea that what allows people to stand out is that they have something interesting to say, which as I noted above was a great thing about Twitter. Similarly, I think ads revenue sharing is very bad, because it incentivizes people to post all kinds of sensational content. I also think that penalizing links in the algorithm is awful and I don't think it will ever stop making me mad. I really hope that Musk will eventually reverse some of those changes, though I'm not optimistic. At the same time, I think some of the changes he introduced are good. For instance, despite being initially skeptical, I actually like the ability to write long tweets. I also really like the ability to organize my bookmarks into folders. Those are relatively small changes that, unlike the other changes I just described, don't get in the way of what I think should be Twitter's main function. At the end of the day, it seems that, for the most part, what made people leave Twitter are things that don't directly affect the platform's ability to continue playing the role it did in the past, but only do so indirectly because it has pissed some people off and made them no longer want to participate. For instance, I agree that it's undesirable for the owner of what has effectively become the public forum to openly take a side in a political election, because that will obviously make it difficult for people to trust the platform to be a honest broker in the public debate. As Cesar famously explained upon divorcing his wife, Cesar's wife should only be innocent, but also be above suspicion. Musk's behavior obviously means that, even if he weren't putting his thumb on the scale by tweaking the algorithm or whatnot (which he probably is), it's hard for people to trust Twitter to be neutral. It's not easy to define algorithmic neutrality, but we don't need to settle that difficult philosophical question to agree that some things, like manually boosting or deboosting specific accounts for ideological reasons, are incompatible with it. However, talking as someone who is right-of-center, I can guarantee you that Twitter also wasn't neutral under the previous management. Musk's fame and personality has made Twitter's bias more obvious than it was, but I don't think it's worse. The main difference is that people who used to be on the right side of the bias are now on the wrong one and they don't like it. This is why I can't help but see the exodus of many academics and journalists as a kind of tantrum. Again, I agree that some of the changes introduced by Musk are objectively bad, but at the end of the day Twitter can still serve the same function it used to as long as people don't leave. Like I keep reading people talking about how they're able to have the kind of discussions on the other place they used to have here, but what concretely prevents them from continuing to have them here, other than the fact that they're pissed at Musk? Not much frankly. It's become a bit jankier and noisier, some things have become more cumbersome, but for the most part if you're here to have interesting discussions it's still very easy. If that has become more difficult, it's less because the changes that Musk has introduced has made that objectively more difficult, than because people are pissed at him for putting his weight behind Trump and they want to punish him. It would be different if I thought that the other place had a realistic chance of becoming what Twitter used to be, but for various reasons I don't think that's realistic, so the most likely outcome of their exodus is a loss of network effects and increase ideological siloing, which is bad for everyone. Again, I don't deny that Musk has made Twitter objectively worse in some ways, but I don't think it can explain all or even most of the reaction by academics/journalists and to be honest I can't help but think it reflects badly on them. Still, that's not a reason not to also blame Musk, because that reaction was entirely predictable and it will make everyone worse off. Maybe the changes he introduced make sense given his goals, I don't think he cares about the same things I do, but I'm not him and even if that's the case I don't see why I should care about that. All I care about is that his decisions will reduce Twitter's value for me.

@JayTrotter27 @themouthmatusow @KamalaHarris Mikey bought Trump's Bible.

@themouthmatusow @KamalaHarris But what if I believe a billionaire from New York cares about working class southerners? How bad is my reading ability then?

If you can’t see thru how phony @KamalaHarris is you should prolly quit playing poker cause your reading ability sucks!

@RakeLark @rf_in_the_bush @__w3b__ @elonmusk Can you explain who you think each side was?

@RakeLark @rf_in_the_bush @__w3b__ @elonmusk Here you go: x.com/TristanSnell/s…

Deliberate deception for this hoax to be repeated. Even Snopes, who hates Trump, fact checks it as false.

@TheChiefNerd @Jason @ABC This one, Chief? x.com/TristanSnell/s…

@Jason @ABC They incorrectly “fact checked” Trump on Project 2025, “very fine people”, etc while letting Kamala spread as many lies as she wanted:

Can someone explain to me what this @ABC ambush claim is? Is it because they fact checked in real time?

@rbsd04 @Zigmanfreud x.com/TristanSnell/s…

@Zigmanfreud Correct me if I'm wrong. I don't believe the moderators fact checked Harris even once?

Really looking forward to the ABC moderators correcting Kamala’s lies about Charlottesville and “bloodbath” after all the Trump “fact checks.” #Debate2024

@WorldStrategist Wow. What is Trump jibbering on about?

The debate is just starting and first question Kamala already has no idea how to answer properly. Wow.

@brad_polumbo This also means 99.9% of AR's are useless.

TikToker: "Who the f*** needs an AR weapon?" There are more than 16 million AR-15s in the US. Just a few hundred people every year are killed with rifles of any kind. More are killed with bare fists or blunt objects. Meaning... 99.9% of AR-15s aren't used to murder anybody.

@thisisura @mtracey @DavidSacks Wrong. You're very uneducated on this topic.

@mtracey @DavidSacks Don’t we have a blueprint for that already! Trump in Ukraine had 100% of their land Kamala in Ukraine has 80% of their land

All Americans should stand against Putin by rejecting his preferred candidate, the weak and ineffectual Kamala Harris.

@luoxiaxia @Jason So let them invade countries at their will is your position. How much more technologically advanced do you think US weapons are to Russia?

Putin wants chaos and you’re falling for it as badly as the media bestie. Proper response is: “Americans are united against Putin’s attempts to interfere in our elections and create division in our country — because he’s a dictator and wants to distract us from his bad behavior.”

@MeidasTouch @RexChapman Elon has been programmed to think a certain way by his own algorithm.

@RexChapman !!

Just over one week ago

@Zigmanfreud You absolutely do need it if you live in a backward state.

Trump has botched the abortion issue all over the place, but this is not a “dodge.” He is correct that there is no need for a federal abortion ban (the states now have the power to do what they want), and being in favor of one would contradict the prime reason for opposing Roe.

@marcthiessen Millions of protesting Israelis agree with Biden.

Disgraceful

@ColleenCaliend2 @Jason Zero Response, expected. 🦗🦗🦗

@ColleenCaliend2 @Jason Name one (who only did the tour).

Imagine defending the brutal beating and pepper spraying of police on January 6th.

@wirraone @Jason @DavidSacks @theallinpod @reidhoffman Not according to the actual medical examiner.

@ShadeandSun @Jason @DavidSacks @theallinpod @reidhoffman The blood clot killed him. There is no other role to play.

Captain Nuance here to save the day... ... on this week's episode of @theallinpod @DavidSacks and @reidhoffman debated the death of police officers on January 6th. A key death of a police officer is Brain Sicknick, who died on January 7th. There's considerable debate by partisans like Sacks and Hoffman about the cause of this death for obvious reasons. Sacks can claim January 6th is being blown out of proportion, and Sicknick died after the event, and Hoffman can claim it was an insurrection and the insurrectionists murdered Sicknick. Officer Sicknick is, tragically, dead and can't tell his story. Officer Sicknick death was caused by two strokes on January 7th. His doctors believe the events of January 6th contributed. The fact is, he was savagely beaten and sprayed with peeper sprayed on January 6th. Doctors have also debated this death. You can read the Wikipedia page linked in a follow-up comment and decide for yourself. They caught the criminal who sprayed him, Julian Khater. That's the image I've attached here from the criminal complaint. Khater pleaded guilty and was sentenced to almost seven years. That's a long time, but everyone knows that assaulting a cop is a very serious crime. My thoughts and prayers are with Officer Sicknick's family and loved ones. I also have sympathy for the criminals like Khater. Some of these rioters planned January 6th in details, but many others simply lost their minds that day. Like Hoffman and Sacks, the rioters were passionate partisans. The only difference is that the rioters (or insurrectionists, you pick your preferred moniker) let their passions turn into physical violence, which is never acceptable. RIP Officer Sicknick

@wirraone @Jason @DavidSacks @theallinpod @reidhoffman Not killed him but played a role. The medical examiner didn't say the spray gave him a blood clot.

@ShadeandSun @Jason @DavidSacks @theallinpod @reidhoffman This is the one piece of evidence that J6 killed him. Why was no one prosecuted for murder, or at least manslaughter? What do they mean "all that transpired?" Are they saying pepper spray gave him a blood clot? Stress? What is the evidence?

@baseballcrank Even though Jan 6 doesn't make Dan's list of momentous negative historical markers he sure makes a good case for another 4 years of a Democrat POTUS.

I certainly don't feel as if a third consecutive Trump election against his worst opponent yet is like when terrorists blew up my office on 9/11, or when my city was paralyzed by Sandy in 2012 or the pandemic in 2020, or when my clients were imploding in September 2008.

Really? I feel the way the generation who lived through the Civil War must have felt about the 1892 election: this is the last gasp of an exhausted political class creating a bunch of unprecedented tempest-in-a-teapot crises over their own smallness.