"Instead the algorithm will be adjusted to avoid giving so much amplification to political divisiveness. "
Good luck with that! What's the model of success here? Facebook? Reddit? Both paradises free of all "political divisiveness" /s This is hilarious, naïve speculation from someone who is probably up to his eyeballs in Tesla/Twitter stock.
I think part of the idea is that many of the reasons people are radicalized is because optimizing for engagement/eyeballs on ads at all costs/magnifying any possible trend means optimizing for the most volatile and evocative news, events and opinions. The loudest and meanest get the most attention, which means that systems to optimise for attention will naturally favor and bolster loud and mean and divisive content.
So by taking twitter private, Musk can technically care about that less than if the company is kept pubic. In theory. In practice, he's not going to burn $40+ billion for purely altruistic goals.
That said, solving divisiveness can be as simple as just banning all opinions that disagree with your own.
This is super-optimistic, and mainly hinges on MuskTwitter successfully getting rid of bots and spam. I'm unconvinced this is possible, much less possible on an ad-supported platform.
Good luck with that! What's the model of success here? Facebook? Reddit? Both paradises free of all "political divisiveness" /s This is hilarious, naïve speculation from someone who is probably up to his eyeballs in Tesla/Twitter stock.