It's the people, and the culture that has built around them.

Twitter, Facebook and all other anti-social-networks are toxic by default. The more engage they manage to get out of you, better for them.

So there is only one thing to do, don't use it.

When something has ads to show you, remember, they get rich, very very rich by getting money from others to show you ads to buy crap you don't need.

Meanwhile, they also don't respect privacy and they will never delete any of what you do there.

On HN you see a good take and you can upvote or engage. You see a bad take and you downvote it. If it's really offensive you can flag it. On Twitter you have two options: you see a good take - upvote or engage, you see a bad take - engage. Both cause the original posts to be shown to more people who get the same choice. By complaining about some content on Twitter you cause more of that content. It's a rage bait machine.

Some players know that very well and will shamelessly lean into it. That celebrity with a terrible post with a typo on top of it? Engagement bait. That politician with a horrible dehumanising idea which would have no chance of ever getting accepted? Engagement bait.

Basically - it's built to be toxic and that brings views and money.

https://xcancel.com/SwiftOnSecurity/status/16125317199111249...

https://xcancel.com/SwiftOnSecurity/status/10835070575616081...

There is good content on the site. But it's nearly impossible to get in a convenient way with the UI options. I've glanced at their APIs and it looks possible to build some clients that presented only what you wanted in a chronological order, filterable by accounts but it would take work.

This is not how human beings are supposed to engage with each other.

I dont like saying this. But it has to be said. I find that these people are generally very simple minded and uneducated.

Meaning that, the only education they get is from other uneducated, simple minded people who post the same simple minded uneducated shit.

On the Hierarchy of men they would be on the bottom rung of the ladder.

Its a case of the classic lone single brain celled mollusc sitting behind a computer screen who laughs out loud to himself when he types the "N" word, calls a women a slag or whore, or call men they dont agree with, a Paedophile, when they could not explain what a Paedophile is, let alone explain what the word hebephile means.

I always think of this scenario that is missing from all social media.

A group of middle aged men are sitting at a table in the local pub having a few drinks.

A young man arrives, stands at the bar, drinking on his own. After a few drinks he starts to verbally abuse the bar maid. The bar maid is visible upset.

The men at the table see, and over hear what the younger man is saying. These men are respectful of women, they have mothers, wives, sisters and female children.

A few of the men decide to go and have a quiet chat with this young man.

They decide that the young man needs to be taught a few lessons about being a real man.

The men have a long conversation with the young man about how to be respectful towards women.

The young man eventually apologises to the bar maid and to the men.

For an eternity this is how older men and fathers have educated young men how to behave and act in society.

social media is not representive of any moral society that I am aware of.

I think the affordances of Twitter contribute. It's easy to repost or quote post or "@" some user ID. This all makes it very easy to dogpile on some post or some user ID.

HN doesn't have reposts of any kind, and no "in universe" way to "@" someone. Much harder to dogpile.

HN down votes are limited as well. A post can get 5 downvotes and then it disappears for those who haven't turned on show dead. A user can only up vote replies to their posts, not down vote. This probably contributed as well.