Discussion thread for Joe Rogan Experience #1258 - Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde & Tim Pool:
Follow on from Joe Rogan Experience #1236 - Jack Dorsey:
my notes
-
1:10:00 I’ve said this for years, stop kicking people off the platform, instead add them a muted list which everyone is automatically subscribed by default but can opt out of. It gives everyone a voice and protects the sensitive.
-
1:25:00 Eerily similar to
It's okay to be white -
1:37:00 This is exactly the fundamental problem with Twitter. You solve difficult dialog through conversation, not text.
-
1:41:00 So Twitter’s future is in profiling you on those axis to encourage growth in those axis. So if you are not receptive, it will try and make you more receptive. IF you are missing certain bits of reality, it will try and fill in the gaps for you. They are in the persona-intersecting-knowledge assimilation game now.
-
1:42:00 Again, shared and automated and auto-subscribed mute lists with timeouts on muted accounts
-
1:43:00 Twitter is too big to move in the direction they envision, but perhaps they will acquire and invest?
-
1:45:00 Another instance of mute lists, however also a statement that future alternatives need to embed the scraped content of all existing platforms, to assimilate all social date, to break the silos
-
1:52:00 Wow. Ok. It could really go the route of the unionisation of Mexico’s Railways in Atlas Shrugged. That is world war level.
-
1:56:00 or again, pushing those cultures whose discourse is banned, off twitter and onto alternatives, defeating the goal of a universal platform
-
2:08:00 as Jack outlined, his goal is to absorb and replace journalism through his controlled Expansion of Knowledge program
-
2:24:00 Great question. Let’s find out.
-
2:28:00 Great point.
-
2:29:00 But Twitter’s goal here from their concern, is thought assimilation, due to Twitter’s political personalities, not actually paradoxical disagreeable existence, but complete agreement
-
2:31:00 great entrepreneurial praxis Jack
-
2:33:00 appeals process, to get reinstated
-
2:34:00 more or less the mute list proposal
-
2:37:00 trust
-
2:45:00 great concern
-
2:48:00 again, a decentralised app that assimilates all social data into a decentralised database… #projects:fountain
-
2:53:00 Jack’s thoughts on regulation
-
2:57:00 Jack: Our AI skills and data means we can trump your decentralised alternatives
-
2:59:00 financial censorship
-
3:01:00 Jack: Depend’s on how we do.
-
3:04:00 Jack’s response to dystopia
-
3:05:00 A platform for the people built by the people; Jack, your hopes are meaningless if it is still fuelled by collusion and competition, closed-source and NDAs; sunlight is the best disinfectant, which is why closed-source companies will be revolted against as there is no way they can claim trust
-
3:09:00 Tim is terrified of a likely civil war
-
3:11:00 People must learn to become reasonable
-
3:11:50 Tim: Culture and information will move faster than your platform can keep up with Jack
-
3:13:20 Jack: What we need is agility; However Jack, how do you plan to do that with a closed-source company of a limited workforce?
-
3:14:00 Tim agrees to disagree, however he doesn’t state why, because he can’t articulate it. However, the difference in ideology is one of universal agreement being the goal, versus universal difference being ok.
-
3:15:00 What would a regulated Twitter be. Jack’s ears pop up.
-
3:16:00 Tim raises profit limit of Twitter.
-
3:18:00 Tim says the media before it dies will try everything they can to destroy all enemies including Twitter on their final stand to claw advertisers
-
3:19:00 Open-source can compete in workforce as skilled people can work for free for something they believe in, however they won’t have the tech supremacy of the big leagues, however that tech supremacy is currently 90% of effort being used for 10% gain and 50% evil (censorship). An alternative platform could be built without such prowess and be functionally similar to users even though dramatically different to the powers that be.
-
3:20:00 Joe: Advertisers won’t flee, they’ll adapt.
-
3:23:00 Wow, what a mishap.
This is an extremely important exchange. At this point in the conversation, they have explicitly stated that they are a global organization not beholden to any one State’s laws. So which regulatory body are they involved with? Who is sending regulators to twitter to be educated? The U.N.? Corporate interests? Russia? China? U.S.? If they are positioning themselves as mediators between non-overlapping regulatory bodies, then twitter immediately becomes a battleground of ideologies between hidden “regulatory” actors, as is pointed out by Tim re: the misgendering aspect. This is not a viable stance in my estimation.