View attachment 5227300
(
archive)
Yes, Ben, you
do want to be chief of the censorship police and arbiter of what information on the internet is "true". If Elon Musk made your life hell, it's a hell of your own making because you are a Twitter addict, and you cannot stand people posting things you do not approve of. Go eat one of those disgusting chop suey sandwiches and cry about it.
Can I step back from that aspect and look at the structure of Ben's contention here?
We should first look at Elon's question, which isn't a stupid one. What's the internet? A mostly textual (but increasingly less so) representation of society. That's all it is. Really, just people's thoughts put into words and images. A mass printing press. Elon's not asking about "the internet" he's asking about
society. I'm not saying that's what Elon intended to ask but it's what his question is really about as would become evident the instant you tried to answer it in any way. The internet is a means, a series of tubes, not the "thing" itself.
Ben's response is expressly ignorant. People "studying" the internet who worked at Twitter don't understand society (or the internet) even if we grant that they were experts in whatever they were studied and understood
that. At best we can say that they understood a particular subgroup, likely highly active Twitter users I imagine, and it's simply a false premise (aka disinformation) to assume this could be extrapolated to the internet (or society) as a whole.
Elon could hire every internet "researcher" on the planet and never understand the internet especially because it would
change as they attempt to research it. Ben rejects this premise because he believes that anyone who claims to be an expert has a complete and total understanding of everything. (Something that almost none of those experts, at least the good ones, would actually ever claim themselves.)