Social Media is for the Birds #nobodycares

[Noodles]

You know one of the most annoying social media things I have noticed.

Sharing YouTube videos to Twitter or Facebook sucks.

Like Half the time Twitter is a link only, it might get a small thumbnail. Facebook seems to not even show the videos to anyone with it's algorithm.

I feel like this is done because both Twitter and Facebook have their own "video platforms". Which is really damn annoying, because YouTube is where everything is, I am sorry your native platform sucks but stop downaying the one everyone uses.

 

[Dakota Tebaldi]

Holy smoke: would you believe that Disney had a chance to acquire Twitter and turned it down because of what a toxic mess Twitter is? It's true.


Although it's really a shame I suppose - though it's weird to say it, I gotta say Twitter might actually be a better place if Disney HAD bought it and cleaned house. They sure as heck would've purged the rapedudes and white nationalists.

 

[Essence Lumin]

Holy smoke: would you believe that Disney had a chance to acquire Twitter and turned it down because of what a toxic mess Twitter is? It's true.


Although it's really a shame I suppose - though it's weird to say it, I gotta say Twitter might actually be a better place if Disney HAD bought it and cleaned house. They sure as heck would've purged the rapedudes and white nationalists.

I suppose that is true. But to get it to Disney standards they would have to purge pretty much everything else too.

 

[Veritable Quandry]

I can't see the situation being better under Disney, just different, probably with restrictions going too far against free speech that is controversial, as opposed to purely hate speech, abuse, and threats. Twitter needs to live in the middle space between a free-for-all and a sanitized PR platform.

On the other hand, I think they should have bought Tumblr and kept it as it was before the porn purge. That would let them profit off the Disney/Star Wars/Marvel porn that is going to happen anyway.

 

[Essence Lumin]

If Disney owned it they would sanitize it except for the orange one's tweets cuz he's the prez.

 

[Free]

 

[Free]

 

[Galen McGinnis]

 

[Free]

And the Security is for the Birds bells keep on chiming!

Twitter admits it used two-factor phone numbers and emails for serving targeted ads | TechCrunch

Twitter has said it used phone numbers and email addresses, provided by users to set up two-factor authentication on their accounts, to serve targeted

techcrunch.com

In a disclosure Tuesday, the social media giant said it did not know how many users were impacted.

The issue stemmed from the company’s tailored audiences program, which allows companies to target advertisements against their own marketing lists, such as phone numbers and email addresses. But Twitter found that when advertisers uploaded their marketing lists, it matched Twitter users to the phone numbers and email addresses users submitted to set up two-factor authentication on their account.

 

[Rose Karuna]

And the Security is for the Birds bells keep on chiming!

Twitter admits it used two-factor phone numbers and emails for serving targeted ads | TechCrunch

Twitter has said it used phone numbers and email addresses, provided by users to set up two-factor authentication on their accounts, to serve targeted

techcrunch.com

Never argue security with Matthew Green, he will always win. My favorite quote: "In all seriousness: whose idea was it to use a valuable advertising identifier as an input to a security system. This is like using raw meat to secure your tent against bears. "

 

[Bartholomew Gallacher]

Holy smoke: would you believe that Disney had a chance to acquire Twitter and turned it down because of what a toxic mess Twitter is? It's true.

Disney is all about making money, while Twitter until late 2017 always lost money. Twitter was just a nasty, rotten smelling garbage dump back then which has not proven back then to be profitable more than a few months in a row and simply not worth to buy.

 

[Isabeau]

Timeline of the most visited websites on the Internet from 1996 to 2019. Worldwide statistics based on websites traffic measured by monthly visits.

 

[Khamon]

*ornhub ha ha ha

 

[Essence Lumin]

That was fun. AOL's numbers kept growing all the way up till Jan 2006 while at the same time it fell to 3rd place. It finally falls off the list in 2011. Google isn't #1 until Jul 2010.

Then at the end Google + Youtube (which of course they own) is 104,000,000 which only Facebook at 23,000,000 can even begin to compare with.

Yahoo is the only site present for the whole video.

 

[Brenda Archer]

That was fun. AOL's numbers kept growing all the way up till Jan 2006 while at the same time it fell to 3rd place. It finally falls off the list in 2011. Google isn't #1 until Jul 2010.

Then at the end Google + Youtube (which of course they own) is 104,000,000 which only Facebook at 23,000,000 can even begin to compare with.

Yahoo is the only site present for the whole video.

Yahoo was oblivious to the ascendancy of smartphones and did not do enough to adapt. By the time I was laid off with the residue of Yahoo! Small Business in early 2016, much of the business was decrepit, assuming users were still mostly on “computers.” Yahoo! Mail had usability problems.

This data tells a tale of attention moving to mobile devices on Android.

Is there anyone out there smart enough to shake this up? Corporate types in general are so oblivious. I remember so many people so skeptical about mobile, set in their ways, dismissive of users unlike themselves.

 

[Free]

 

[Dakota Tebaldi]

ATTENTION

 

[Free]

All-caps Facebook deserves a look. NOPE.

 

[Romana]

Social media trending topics, on Facebook or on Twitter, or whoever has them are most assuredly for the birds. All you need to make a topic trend is an army of bots or trolls, but the people who are doing this, who know they're gaming the system, act like this makes whatever BS they're trending true.
Or is it just another "pwn the libs" thing?

 

[Brenda Archer]

Social media trending topics, on Facebook or on Twitter, or whoever has them are most assuredly for the birds. All you need to make a topic trend is an army of bots or trolls, but the people who are doing this, who know they're gaming the system, act like this makes whatever BS they're trending true.
Or is it just another "pwn the libs" thing?

I’m not quite sure what they mean to gain from it, unless it’s to persuade or scam gullible people. Although I do see people getting demoralized on Twitter who don’t realize how many accounts are “bots.” The “bots” all argue in the same odd, demeaning way, most of them are bad at literate English, and they all sound alike after a while.