Musk has changed Twitter's algorithm so you'll see MORE tweets like those you trash

[highplainsdem]

This is insane.

Link to tweet

Trashing accounts that you hate will cause our algorithm to show you more of those accounts, as it is keying off of your interactions.

Basically saying if you love trashing *that* account, then you will probably also love trashing *this* account. Not actually wrong lol.

Yes, it is wrong.


I nearly posted a thread here yesterday about the Musk tweet below and how he's using the people on Twitter as playthings, but I scrapped it because there seems to be some new craziness from Musk every day. I've seen evidence of his malicious tinkering with Twitter's algorithm since the early days of his mismanagement, and I keep hoping he'll be forced out somehow, maybe by Tesla shareholders demanding he stop making himself look crazier with what he's doing on Twitter.

But I want to post what he admitted about the algorithm yesterday, because I saw a reply to Musk this morning that shows other people have the same take on the madness of child-king Elon.

Link to tweet

People on the right should see more “left wing” stuff and people on the left should see more “right wing” stuff.

But you can just block it if you want to stay in an echo chamber.

That got this response from Rob Graves ( https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Graves ):

Link to tweet

I do hope @elonmusk will start considering the implications of using algorithms designed for the sole purpose of inciting people.

This is literally just playing with the dopamine cycles and mental health of individuals to drive advertising revenue.

It needs to be addressed.

Yes. And it's much more dangerous now that Musk has admitted Twitter won't allow people to block what they don't want to see.

[CurtEastPoint]

1. God, I hate him.

[Meadowoak]

2. I predict that Twitter won't be around much longer.

[brooklynite]

3. SImple solution: don't "trash" them.

Either Mute or Block. Complaining about someone's account is interpreted as interest in the account.

[highplainsdem]

4. I've seen lots of tweets from people saying block and mute aren't working.

Just as follow and unfollow aren't always working.

[brooklynite]

7. Works for me.

[highplainsdem]

9. Good. But it isn't working for everyone.

[dsc]

12. and what is to stop him from then showing you more

of the things you mute and block. I, incidently, have done none of those things but my feed has become more and more rightwing over the last couple of months. Twitter is becoming useless.

[brooklynite]

13. All I can tell you is that "he" isn't

I've curated my list of follows, and I'm not getting flooded with RWers.

[Emrys]

14. I use mute, never block.

As a "silent" Twitter account, I do it extensively. I must have muted thousands of accounts by now! And mute works quite efficiently for me.

It also leaves me the option of seeing what they're burbling or ranting about (and very occasionally revising my decisions) on the not infrequent occasions when all I'm seeing under a tweet is loads of muted responses (Scotland's The National newspaper account is an utter magnet for rabid unionists and trolls, most of which are shrieking into the void as far as I'm concerned, or end up doing so once I've done the required clicking).

Musk's algorithm tinkering relies on people using the feeds Twitter provides. I never do. I follow no one. I'll check out some trending subjects or hashtags, but if there's a load of garbage in there, I've decided to expose myself to it, so have no one to blame but myself (and my muting finger gets a workout if I can be bothered). Otherwise, I just check out individual accounts or some Twitter lists I have on various subjects.

[niyad]

5. egoloon muskrat is a dangerous waste of resources.

[sarcasmo]

6. Thankfully I deleted my account.

[Sympthsical]

8. I'm not sure how people are surprised that algorithms work this way

This isn't a Musk thing, this is a social media thing.

It's like Fox News. Everyone loves trashing Fox News. But . . . they're still watching it. Check out the demographics some time. It ain't all Republicans by a long way. Hate engagement is still engagement. It reminds me of that scene from the Howard Stern biopic where they discuss his ratings. "The average Howard Stern fan listens for an hour and twenty minutes. They want to see what he'll say next. The average Stern hater listens to two and a half hours a day. They want to see what he'll say next."

What you engage on social media is exactly what you get. Look at DU. What threads are posted most and get the most interaction? It isn't, "I watched CNN today and it was mostly fine." It has to be something to get the blood pressure spiking, something to pique wandering eyeballs. "Random crime happened." That's not a story. Now add something to it. Was it a right-winger? Can we blame a politician we dislike for it? Is there a potential hate crime component? There ya go. That'll get people riled. Now we have a stew going.

This is every social media platform ever. They don't care about what you're looking at - they just want to make sure you're looking. And we teach these algorithms what engages us. These formulae weren't invented out of a clear blue sky. The data and software engineers analyze our behavior, our actions, our interests, and they designed algorithms custom built to cater to our personalities.

If you don't want to see something on social media, you don't engage in it. Period. I don't see right-wing stuff on Twitter. Why? Because I don't hang around talking about Tucker Carlson all day. I get astronomy things or movie trivia or online games related materials.

If you put garbage in, you get garbage back.

And I agree it's not great for mental health. Internet addiction is real. People like their dopamine hits. Relatedly, outrage addiction is real. People float around the internet all day looking for those hits, those stories they can, "CAN YOU EVEN?! ARRRRRGH!" Get some tribalism worked in so you can run off to your in-group and share in the communal rage and anxiety in order to feel that sense of belonging.

It's all fucked up.

But people do it. When people talk, the money listens.

[CentralMass]

11. I'm not so sure. Facebook seems to do a good job of filiering

out content when you select see less of this type of content.

[kysrsoze]

10. You won't see any of it if you delete your account. Why support this shitshow?

Time to move on.

[dutch777]

16. That is my question...why stay tuned in to Twitter? I m tired of seeing a string of Tweets...

masquerading as "journalism", but after the hack journalists, why is anyone still interested in being Twits?

[mopinko]

15. i've been blocking suggestions for a while. it's a window into the algorithm.

i just go on shooting sprees. anything in the rt sidebar, boom.
it does, indeed, serve up similar accounts, sometimes by the dozen. i trashed a car company and i stopped counting at 2 doz like accounts.
it will also show you who is still putting money into this cesspool.

it does also show how weird it can be. it served up a closed account several times over a few days. and it serves up some itty bitty accounts.

[Fullduplexxx]

17. Sounds like he is deliberately trying to destroy it