Their logic for why they're on TikTok and Facebook seems sound to me, but doesn't that same logic apply to X? I kept waiting for the explanation but it never came...

▲

mghackerlady 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

there isn't enough people left there to be worth the tradeoff

▲

Ajedi32 3 hours ago | parent [-]

13 million impressions a year isn't enough to be worth copy-pasting a few posts from Facebook?

▲

ceejayoz 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not if enough folks think your posting there is a sign you're an ass.

If you hang out in a bar with KKK memorabilia everywhere - and open the replies of any reasonably popular news story on X before complaining that's not a fair comparison - people make conclusions off your presence, even if you're personally there for the tasty beer.

▲

rockemsockem an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I have never seen KKK posts on X. Either you're commenting from personal experience, in which case, wow, who were you following, or you're going off reporting which would seem to be a bit skewed.

▲

satvikpendem 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Those people would have long left X though so I'm not sure why the existing people would think that. If you're talking about external people judging them about posting there, no one thinks that, like the sibling comment mentions. People will just think at worst that they might need the reach of X so they begrudgingly post there.

▲

24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

loeg 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

cosmic_cheese 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Even if I make an effort to train its algorithm away from overtly political posts, I frequently see all manner of far-right garbage in the replies, often including racial slurs among other nastiness. That kind of thing existed in the Twitter days too, but at least back then it was at dramatically lower volumes and repeat offenders usually got banned. Now it runs rampant, largely coming from bot accounts posting from south-east Asia and various parts of Africa.

▲

ceejayoz 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Those are two directly contradictory statements.

	▲	loeg 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		[flagged]

▲

qzx_pierri 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

EricDeb 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

X "impressions" are not worth very much

▲

rc_kas an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

At least half of those are bots.

▲

the_real_cher 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I had that exact same thought. The argument they presented applies to any walled garden, they gave no reason why X would be the exception.

It's clear this is about politics, and I'm not opposed to that, Elon is not awesome, but trying to justify it otherwise seems kind of shady.

▲

ethanrutherford 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It's pretty damn simple actually. Their target audience by and large doesn't use twitter anymore, either.

▲

Ajedi32 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They're a global issues advocacy organization. "Their target audience" is everyone, or at least it ought to be if they're doing their job right.

Ignoring people of any demographic or political persuasion would be a serious strategic mistake in my opinion.

▲

indoordin0saur 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The current electronic frontier is AI and X is the place where high level AI researchers, developers, influencers and users converse. IDK where else has more of the intellectual discourse on AI. Definitely not the likes of instagram or TikTok. Sure, those platforms are more censored and kid friendly, but I don't think that's really who the EFF should be focusing on as their audience.

	▲	rockemsockem an hour ago \| parent [-]
		This is a great point and it makes we worried that EFF might be pivoting to be less about the technological frontier and more about social issues.

▲

samename 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]