Sir, you are controlling the buttons you push. I.e. it's up to you who you follow and what exactly you read on Twitter - just like any other social network.
There are news that are circulating much faster on Twitter than anywhere else (for example about war in Ukraine). There are people and companies that post only on Twitter and nowhere else (especially in tech).
> it's up to you who you follow and what exactly you read on Twitter
The Twitter experience is a highly algorithmic feed where tweets from the people you follow are not guaranteed to be in chronological order, or even shown to you at all. The default experience also mixes it other tweets "you might be interested in", that is, things they want you to see.
There's also the fact people could freely see tweets and follow discussion threads, that's now locked behind an account requirement.
There’s likely some information on there that some people must want to share if services like Xcancel and Nitter exist and allow you to share it without being on X itself.
General sentiment might be this, but every social network (even Instagram and Facebook) can be good and productive if you change how you use them.
If you follow specific profiles/channels/pages and just read the feeds from them as if they were news, you are removing the toxic part (mostly infinite scrolling) and getting a resourceful feature.
If for some reason someone you need to follow is on X (twitter) only, you have to choose between losing a source or compromise with the platform.
I personally belong to the former group (and possibly you do, too), leaving behind sources, but not everyone likes it that way ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The platform compromise is a new thing. One of the reasons people used Twitter was its open nature, enabling its use as a bulletin board where anyone could post a message and being sure that the message link was free for anyone to see. This isn't the case anymore, as X forces people to make accounts to see messages.
If someone thinks Twitter is an echo chamber to the extent they can’t fathom how people tolerate it (and it isn’t just an appeal for easy upvotes), but they happily post on HN, they’ll be able to clear up their initial confusion with a bit of self reflection.
There are news that are circulating much faster on Twitter than anywhere else (for example about war in Ukraine). There are people and companies that post only on Twitter and nowhere else (especially in tech).
The Twitter experience is a highly algorithmic feed where tweets from the people you follow are not guaranteed to be in chronological order, or even shown to you at all. The default experience also mixes it other tweets "you might be interested in", that is, things they want you to see.
There's also the fact people could freely see tweets and follow discussion threads, that's now locked behind an account requirement.
If you follow specific profiles/channels/pages and just read the feeds from them as if they were news, you are removing the toxic part (mostly infinite scrolling) and getting a resourceful feature.
If for some reason someone you need to follow is on X (twitter) only, you have to choose between losing a source or compromise with the platform.
I personally belong to the former group (and possibly you do, too), leaving behind sources, but not everyone likes it that way ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I thought so too. But after leaving 3 years ago it turns out: Not a single source is that important.
Also, as the importance increases, the likelihood of seeing the same information outside that hellhole increases linearly.
And then I avoid them.
Hacker News and basically everyone from YC have an official profile on Twitter: https://x.com/hackernews
Although, I don't see how this will hold up in court as they're pretty much an archive-like site hosting UGC.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49449576