Cpvr

Who exactly will see themselves out of business if they’re not utilizing AI? Graphic designers, content creators, business owners? Absolutely not. If people are resisting the use of it, it’s because they see value in utilizing their own skills that they’ve developed over the years. AI makes it easier to do things, however, it’s not a fundamentally replacement to those that were able to be successful without it.

Musk's xAI acquires X in $45 billion all-stock deal Combined company valued at $80 billion, Musk announces xAI raised $6 billion at $40 billion valuation, sources say March 28 (Reuters) - Elon Musk said on Friday that his xAI has acquired X, the social media app formerly known as Twitter, in an all-stock transaction for $45 billion, including debt. "xAI and X's futures are intertwined. Today, we officially take the step to combine the data, models, compute, distribution and talent," Musk said in a post on X, adding that the combined company would be valued at $80 billion. The billionaire's AI startup, which was launched in 2023, recently raised $6 billion from investors at a valuation of $40 billion, sources have told Reuters. Source: https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/musks-xai-buys-social-media-platform-x-45-billion-2025-03-28/

If one was interested in obtaining a social media certification, where can they go to obtain one?😉

namecheap is good when you’re using beginner hosting, but I wouldn’t rely on them if I had a site with high traffic. They’re cheap for a reason.

No, I wouldn’t pay someone to do my laundry. I’d rather do my own and save money.

Okay, this might sound a little confusing to non-Reddit users. Reddit has announced that it’s making a change to its messaging options, by integrating its DM inbox into its Reddit Chat element. Yes, Reddit has two separate messaging-aligned functions. Reddit’s “Chat” tab, which it added back in 2023, is where you’ll find group discussions, and real-time chats about topics of interest, which anybody can join. It then has its messaging “Inbox” on a separate tab, where you can find notifications about your Reddit activity, as well as DMs. But now, all of these are going to be rolled into one single tab. Seemingly, but then again, these sample screens still have both a “Chat” and an “Inbox” tab, so… As explained by Reddit: “Reddit Chat is replacing user PMs. This transition consolidates messaging on Reddit and introduces features like pinned chats for better organization, an unread filter, a new spam folder, more sender context when accepting invites, an allowlist, and a faster experience.” So your inbox is seemingly going to be transitioned over, but I’m not sure what that means for the “Inbox” tab, though Reddit does also note that existing PMs will remain archived as read-only for reference. Maybe they’ll live in that tab (Reddit also notes that it won’t be disabling DMs till users have had a chance to access them in archive mode, so maybe the tab will disappear at a later stage). Reddit says that change is designed to help to streamline its systems: “This consolidation helps us focus on improving one system instead of maintaining multiple. Plus, Reddit Chat’s infrastructure is built for the future, unlike the PM system which is about as old as Reddit itself.” Though many Redditors claim that Reddit has only been slowed down by its increasing ad load, not by functional elements. Yet, even so, Reddit needs to make money, so one way or another, this will improve the app’s performance. Reddit says that the updated chat UI will begin rolling out soon, with the changes set to be phased in over the next three months. It’ll be a shift in focus for Reddit users, but essentially, the aim is to bring all of its connective notifications into a single stream, while also adding more filters to better manage your messages in the app. Source: https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/reddit-consolidates-dms-pms-messaging-chats/743151/[ATTACH type=full]1441[/ATTACH]

Google will remain the #1 search engine forever. No other company will ever take its crown. With the rise of AI-powered search systems, Google has already adapted by integrating AI overviews alongside its traditional search engine. Google overtook Ask Jeeves and Yahoo back in the day through innovation and uniqueness, and if another company were capable of surpassing Google, it would have happened already. Bing essentially reverse-engineers Google's system. DuckDuckGo sources its results from Bing and Yandex, along with its own crawler and analysis. Bing also powers Yahoo's search engine. Google currently controls 89-90% of the search engine market share as well. Which goes to show you, it takes multiple companies just to try and "compete" against the powerhouse that Google has become.

Should also post it on the /Redditalternatives section. There’s a lot of traction in that subreddit. There’s always users seeking alternatives.😂

The march core update is done rolling out. Have you seen any shifts in your search traffic this month? Google's March 2025 core update is now done rolling out, it took 14 days, starting on March 13, 2025 at around 12:23 pm ET and ending on March 27, 2025 at around 8:34 am ET. Google postedsaying, "The rollout was complete as of March 27, 2025." [HEADING=1]Google March 2025 Core Update Quick Facts:[/HEADING] Here are the most important things that we know right now in short form: Name: Google March 2025 Broad Core Update Launched: March 13, 2025 at around 12:30 pm ET Completed: March 27, 2025 at around 8:34 am ET Targets: It looks at all types of content Penalty: It is not a penalty, it promotes or rewards great web pages Global: This is a global update impacting all regions, in all languages. Impact: The normal core update - updating some of the "core systems". Google said this March update is a "regular update." Maybe content creators will see better results but not sure on that. Discover: Core updates impact Google Discover and other features, also feature snippets and more. Recover: If you were hit by this, then you will need to look at your content and see if you can do better with Google's core update advice. Refreshes: Google will do periodic refreshes to this algorithm but may not communicate those updates in the future. Maybe this is what we saw the past couple of weeks or all those unconfirmed Google updates. [HEADING=1][/HEADING]

Facebook pages can also be monetized and make you money if you prefer to use them as such. I’m pretty sure the same applies for facebook groups as well. Those that follow your facebook page are able to send you stars and you’re also able to earn via views depending on big the page gets.

AI generated content also leads to the search engines laying the smack down on sites, especially if they're full of AI-generated content and not human-written content. Human written content is the way to go for better or for worst. Using AI tools to help you write and come up with ideas isn't a bad idea as long as it's used in your own tone & written by you, however, it becomes a major problem when you're making a site that's full of AI-content. Human content will out rank AI-generated content all day and everyday. More personal and emotional based content will always lead to better results, no matter how anyone spins it.

I'm currently listening to Bosses by yo gotti.

According to details surfacing online, ad management firm Mediavine is terminating publishers’ accounts for overusing AI. Mediavine is a leading ad management company providing products and services to help website publishers monetize their content. The company holds elite status as a Google Certified Publishing Partner, which indicates that it meets Google’s highest standards and requirements for ad networks and exchanges. [HEADING=1]AI Content Triggers Account Terminations[/HEADING] The terminations came to light in a post on the Reddit forum r/Blogging, where a user shared an email they received from Mediavine citing “overuse of artificially created content.” Trista Jensen, Mediavine’s Director of Ad Operations & Market Quality, states in the email: Jensen stated that due to the overuse of AI content, “our top partners will stop spending on your sites, which will negatively affect future monetization efforts.” Consequently, Mediavine terminated the publisher’s account “effective immediately.” [HEADING=1]The Risks Of Low-Quality AI Content[/HEADING] This strict enforcement aligns with Mediavine’s publicly stated policy prohibiting websites from using “low-quality, mass-produced, unedited or undisclosed AI content that is scraped from other websites.” In a March 7 blog posttitled “AI and Our Commitment to a Creator-First Future,” the company declared opposition to low-value AI content that could “devalue the contributions of legitimate content creators.” Mediavine warned in the post: The company says it’s using its platform to “advocate for publishers” and uphold quality standards in the face of AI’s disruptive potential. Mediavine states: [HEADING=1]Targeting ‘AI Clickbait Kingpin’ Tactics[/HEADING] While the Reddit user’s identity wasn’t disclosed, the incident has drawn connections to the tactics of Nebojša Vujinović Vujo, who was dubbed an “AI Clickbait Kingpin” in a recent Wired exposé. According to Wired, Vujo acquired over 2,000 dormant domains and populated them with AI-generated, search-optimized content designed purely to capture ad revenue. His strategies represent the low-quality, artificial content Mediavine has vowed to prohibit. [HEADING=1]Potential Implications[/HEADING] [HEADING=2]Lost Revenue[/HEADING] Mediavine’s terminations highlight potential implications for publishers that rely on artificial intelligence to generate website content at scale. Perhaps the most immediate and tangible implication is the risk of losing ad revenue. For publishers that depend heavily on programmatic advertising or sponsored content deals as key revenue drivers, being blocked from major ad networks could devastate their business models. [HEADING=2]Devalued Domains[/HEADING] Another potential impact is the devaluation of domains and websites built primarily on AI-generated content. If this pattern of AI content overuse triggers account terminations from companies like Mediavine, it could drastically diminish the value proposition of scooping up these domains. Source: https://www.searchenginejournal.com/mediavine-bans-publisher-for-overuse-of-ai-generated-content/526343/ Latest discussions regarding Mediavine’s bans, 500 publishers have now been dropped from the network: https://www.reddit.com/r/Blogging/s/GgfeQXYYpx

Taking a deep dive into what made larger communities thrive could be valuable. Studying their early days, their growth strategies, and how their discussions evolved over time can provide useful insights for building your own community. Smaller communities have a unique charm, but there comes a point where growth is inevitable. The real question is: do you try to maintain a small, tight-knit space, or do you embrace growth while preserving what made the community special? Keeping the core foundation intact is key,this ensures that even as the community expands, it still feels like home. As long as you stay true to what made the community great in the first place, it will continue to do just fine.

What exactly did digg implement? I missed that aspect of Digg. I remember them implementing a new design though. A lot of digg’s former users migrated to Reddit, which helped them grow in the beginning. However, with Digg returning soon it’ll be interesting to see what happens.

I get where you’re coming from, and for a lot of people, a big enough offer would be a no-brainer. But for some of us, our sites aren’t just businesses or projects, they’re a part of who we are. My forum has been with me through everything, from my childhood(teenage years) to adulthood. It’s not about the money for me. I’ve seen and handled plenty, but money comes and goes. Passion and the deep connection to a community? That’s something you can’t just sell off. For some of us, it’s never just about a number, it’s about what it means to us.

Big changes are underway for the internet’s most popular product, and Google (and the web) may never be the same. One day in 2021, Google’s web search team presented leadership with what was, at the time, a novel proposal: Rather than just have the search engine serve up its familiar list of links, have a chatbot greet visitors at the search results page and offer to answer questions directly. This wasn’t necessarily a shocking idea. Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai had been talking for years about redesigning Alphabet Inc., Google’s parent company, around artificial intelligence, and the organization ran DeepMind and Google Brain, two of the world’s most sophisticated AI labs. Still, the team’s management bristled at the proposal, according to a former employee with direct knowledge of those conversations. Googlers rarely suggested tinkering with the search engine’s fundamental design. “It was self-regulation. People just weren’t daring to think the thoughts,” the former employee says. The division’s leadership worried that its latest AI, though promising, wasn’t accurate enough. And even if it worked perfectly, answering users’ questions with AI risked upending Google’s core business of mixing so-called organic links with a healthy dose of targeted ads. The idea died, at least for the time being. For more than two decades, Google Search has ruled the web. It serves as the primary gateway to the internet for billions of people—it currently processes almost 200,000 queries each second, according to the digital marketing company Semrush Holdings Inc. Roughly two-thirds of all web traffic referrals come from the search engine. Search is also Google’s beating heart, generating more than $198 billion in revenue in 2024, almost 60% of Alphabet’s annual sales. The machine is still humming away, but a chorus of discontent has been building among the web-going public in recent years. Users complain that Google results are increasingly larded with advertising and self-serving features. Its power over the web also means a substantial portion of the internet has been designed primarily not for human consumption but for Google’s own web scrapers. Junky sites with poorly researched listicles or aggregated product reviews seize prominent space in results, frustrating users and grabbing ad revenue from more useful websites less versed in search engine optimization. Tech critics (and lawyers representing the federal government in antitrust litigation) have been arguing that Google’s continued dominance in the face of such shortcomings is proof that the search market is no longer competitive. Then in 2022, OpenAIintroduced something new. ChatGPT bore a notable resemblance to the 2021 proposal Google had rejected. Like the original version of Google, OpenAI’s chatbot provided a simple field for entering text and not much else. The results it spit out didn’t display ads above the real answers or offer links to long-winded recipe sites where multiple autoplaying videos made it hard to concentrate on the steps to make a chickpea salad. And even though its answers weren’t always right, the sheer novelty meant users gave OpenAI a level of grace they might not have extended to the long-running leader of the search world. [HEADING=2][/HEADING] One thing that really stung about ChatGPT’s rise was that it was built on Google’s own inventions. OpenAI’s chatbot uses an AI architecture that Google detailed in a now-legendary research paperpublished in 2017. The breakthrough, a system known as a transformer that helps AI models zero in on the most important pieces of information they’re analyzing, was free for all to use. That Google’s engineering team had woven the technology into search only in the safest of ways showed how much the company struggled to translate its AI breakthroughs into substantial consumer products. Around the time ChatGPT arrived, pushing through this inertia became the job of Elizabeth Reid. A veteran Googler, Reid joined the search team in 2021 and took over the unit in March 2024. Since then she’s ushered in some of the biggest changes to Google’s core product in years—most notably AI Overviews, which cedes the most prominent space on the search results page to AI-generated responses. In March the company said it will begin experimenting with “AI Mode,” a dedicated tab on its homepage that offers a chat-based search experience similar to what it had rejected four years ago. Reid refers to her approach as a “constant evolution” rather than a complete overhaul. Her team is still struggling to define the purpose of Google Search in this new era, according to interviews with 21 current and former search executives and employees, most of whom requested anonymity to avoid straining professional relationships, plus more than two dozen other people in the tech and media industries. Illustration: Cameron Galley for Bloomberg Businessweek In the meantime, multiple independent web publishers say their traffic has been falling. They say AI Overviews poses a particular challenge because it presents information directly on Google’s own results pages that users previously would have gotten by clicking through to the websites where it originated. In February the online education company Chegg Inc. sued Alphabet, saying the search feature was cribbing Chegg’s own content, posing a dire warning to the company. Google’s conduct “threatens to leave the public with an increasingly unrecognizable internet experience, in which users never leave Google’s walled garden and receive only synthetic, error-ridden answers,” Chegg said in its suit. José Castañeda, a Google spokesperson, responded to the suit by saying the company would “defend against these meritless claims.” AI’s impact on Google itself is just beginning to show. Its search engine is one of the most profitable technologies ever developed, and, more than two years after ChatGPT’s debut, there’s little evidence that this is changing, though some analysts anticipate slower search revenue growth in the coming years. The company made more than $200 billion in gross profit last year. Still, Google is acting with urgency. Shortly after OpenAI released ChatGPT, Google reassigned more than 1,000 engineers, about 20% of the search engineering team, to generative AI efforts (albeit with only vague marching orders), according to a former Google employee. In an interview with Bloomberg Businessweek, Pichai, who’s said that AI is a bigger deal than fire or electricity, says the world is on the verge of a radical transformation in the way it interacts with information. “I think we are at 1% of what humanity’s information needs are today,” he says. “It’ll be obvious a decade or 20 years from now. And I think we are underestimating how early all of this is.” And so this is an existential moment for Google. It may also be an existential moment for the web itself. Prior to ChatGPT, Google’s search team was deep into what Arvind Jain, who held the title of distinguished engineer at Google until 2014, called “maintenance mode.” Thousands of engineers tended to an internal code base to keep the profits rolling in. It was vast and full of relics from years past, including 100,000 lines of code to make a feature that allowed people to vote in the 13th season of American Idol. (The initial code base for Uber Technologies Inc.numbered about 10,000 lines.) Search engineers fought over the currency of the realm: latency, or how long a web page takes to load. New features risked increasing load times, so Google invented a system that one former manager likened to cap-and-trade schemes for carbon emissions. To release new projects, teams first had to show they’d reduced latency elsewhere, sending engineers on missions to make unrelated parts of Google Search slightly faster. Other times they toiled on projects they knew were pointless. In 2020 a former Google manager was charged with helping a team of dozens of engineers who were working on a project to make web search infrastructure more efficient. About six months in, a vice president let slip that he had no intention of releasing the project. But he advised the manager to keep going so the engineers would have something to show their bosses at the end of the year. Not everyone at Google hated such assignments. One former employee says people sometimes found it relaxing to work on projects for which everyone knew the stakes were low. But the barriers to introducing products hurt morale among engineers and sparked tension between management and rank-and-filers. In 2021, Manu Cornet, a search engineer who was also Google’s resident cartoonist, captured the dynamic by sketching an image of a massive cargo ship with cannons, towers and cranes grafted on top of an aging hull patched with duct tape. Surveying the horizon from the deck, the captain remarks, “Poor execution speed. The rowers need a culture shift.” Google did sometimes push the bounds of search, as it did in 2016 with Google Assistant, a feature to field simple voice commands, such as checking the weather or finding out who’d won the Warriors game. Many Googlers wanted to push this further, but momentum was tempered by uncertainty about how the product would work with its existing advertising-based business model, according to two people familiar with the matter, one of whom framed the debate as an early taste of the angst that generative AI would bring. “How the f--- do we put an ad on it?” the former manager says of voice search. “That’s when the real crisis started.” Google’s role as a web indexer insulated it from the unreliability of the open internet: Because it was simply pointing to other sites, its users were less likely to blame it for things they found there. The company was periodically criticized for serving as a distribution system for scams and offensive content. But the reputational risks would clearly increase if Google began providing more information directly. Google has been struggling with the implications of making that shift for more than a decade. In 2012 the company balked at releasing the Knowledge Graph, a collection of important facts about the world. The database, assembled by pulling information from sites Google scraped for search, could help the company respond to queries with direct answers and photographs. After months of work, it determined it had reached more than 95% accuracy, according to a former employee. But the product provided incorrect information in an internal presentation, and executives refused to give the green light. These hesitations would slow the company’s response to generative AI as well. “They had the burden of, Google speaks the truth,” says Jain, the former distinguished engineer. Engineers eventually met Google’s bar, and the product went ahead that same year. Once the toolwas public, the dilemma switched from its accuracy to its impact on the economics of the web. The sites that Google pulled the information from relied on its search engine to send them web traffic and, often, ad revenue. Later, in internal meetings, Google executives argued the data was fair game because Google credited sources such as Wikipedia in small print beneath its answers, according to one of the former employees. Googlers were well aware of the tension between the preferences of users, who liked getting information quickly, and the needs of websites that produced that information. “I don’t know what the right answer is,” Cornet says. “I would say that, at least as an employee, I felt like the focus on the user was a good enough reason for me to think that Google wasn’t trying to do anything nefarious—even though it may put some companies out of business.” On the flip side, Google’s business model also supported services that were distinctly not useful for users but were tuned to extract ad revenue, like scammy product affiliate sites and clickbaity news aggregators. Within the past several years blog posts began appearing about the declining quality of Google Search. Users started trying to avoid low-quality sites with tricks such as appending the term “Reddit” to their queries in the hope of locating threads where the information was coming from real people. “Google wasn’t trying to do anything nefarious—even though it may put some companies out of business” It’s hard to empirically measure the quality of something as vast and ever-changing as Google Search. But academics who’ve studied the subject say quality has notably declined. “I think there really is a feeling of decay that is just widely felt,” says Emma Lurie, a doctoral candidate at the University of California at Berkeley who’s been studying search engines since 2017. Some Googlers bristled at these complaints. Representatives for Google point to independent assessments determining that its results are higher quality than other search engines. “People have high expectations for search and what it does for them,” says Pandu Nayak, Google’s chief search scientist. “And when it delivers on those high expectations, they don’t notice it because it’s just working the way it should.” Even within the company, criticism was mounting that Google was being guided by the wrong incentives. There’s natural tension between the search unit, which worked to produce the most useful results to users’ queries, and the advertising division, which looked to maximize the revenue those queries produced. To keep the priorities of the advertising division from distorting organic search results, those two divisions had traditionally been separated. Some Googlers felt the firewall was weakening as growth leveled off, according to two former employees who’d worked in search. In early 2019, Google declared a “Code Yellow,” because it might not meet its goals for search revenue for the quarter, according to documents unearthed in the US Department of Justice’s 2023 antitrust trial over Google’s search engine, which ultimately resulted in a federal judge’s ruling that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in search. (The company has said it will appeal.) As part of the Code Yellow emergency, engineers from Google’s search and Chrome browser teams were reassigned to figure out why user queries had slowed. This trend spelled trouble for Google’s advertising business, because each query represents an opportunity to display a targeted ad. But the actions Google took to address this problem made then-search chief Ben Gomes uncomfortable. “I think it is good for us to aspire to query growth and to aspire to more users. But I think we are getting too involved with ads for the good of the product and company,” Gomes wrote in an email made public during the trial. Google called off the Code Yellow seven weeks after it began, with Prabhakar Raghavan, then head of Google’s advertising division, praising “heroic” engineering for helping the company reach its revenue goals despite the slowdown in queries. Shortly thereafter, Gomes shifted into a new role in the educational division, and Raghavan became head of both search and ads—further eroding the divide in the eyes of some Googlers. When asked about such concerns, Pichai says that “commercial information is information, too,” and that advertising can be valuable as long as it’s clearly identified. “The true north is the users,” he says. “I think focusing on the users and focusing on quality ends up being the approach by which we will do it all.” The 2019 concerns about query volume would seem quaint compared with the reaction to ChatGPT. Reid had joined the search team only 19 months before and was still learning how it differed from her previous posting at the company’s Maps division. “It’s like you’re the next-door neighbor who was always in the house, but not after bedtime,” Reid says. She pantomimes inspecting the depths of a closet. “You still have a lot to learn.” Some people who worked at Google when ChatGPT arrived describe a panic sweeping through the company. But, recalling the moment as she guides a pair of Businessweekreporters around the Googleplex in Mountain View, California, while dressed in an outfit based on Google’s rainbow palette, Reid downplays the idea that the company was shaken by the news. There were plenty of people at Google old enough to remember when Microsoft Corp.’s 2009 release of the Bing search engine was seen as an existential threat. (It wasn’t.) Business as usual had generally worked, and some weren’t inclined to rock the boat. Reid, though, was ready to implement real changes. “She is very data-driven,” says Brian McClendon, who worked with her on Google Maps and is now a senior vice president at Niantic Inc. “She would not make a change based on hope, but if she believed she had the data, that this other way is better, she’d be a steamroller to get there.” Full Article: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-03-24/google-s-ai-search-overhaul-racing-chatgpt-for-the-web-s-future

I can see why articles and guides might have a word count requirement, as they focus more on quality and depth. But when it comes to regular forum posts and threads, engagement and discussion should take priority. If a forum imposes strict posting limitations, it risks stifling conversation and pushing members away. A strong community is built on interaction, and placing unnecessary barriers only weakens that foundation.

Same. I only use it on a rare occasion now. I’m more active on Bluesky and Threads. I still have a few friends that use Twitter so I keep in touch with them on there.

Welcome to swc!

What did the email say exactly? Did they ask you for a bitcoin transfer or something? 🤔 What plugins/add ons were you using?

If you’re running a WordPress site, security should be a top priority as once you start getting traffic, you’re also on the radar of bots and hackers. A lot of WordPress hacks happen because site owners get lazy or don’t know what they’re doing. WordPress itself, themes and plugins, be sure update them regularly. Outdated software is a hacker’s playground. If you’re still using admin as your username, change it now. Use strong, unique passwords or even better and enable two-factor authentication (2FA). Brute force attacks happen when hackers keep guessing passwords. Use a plugin like Limit Login Attempts Reloaded to block multiple failed attempts. Something like Wordfence or iThemes Security can help monitor for threats and block malicious activity. Cheap hosting often means weak security. Go with a reputable host that providers firewalls, malware scanning, and automated backups. Your wp-config.php file should also be locked down (set to 400 or 440 permissions) so no one can mess with it. Don’t just set it and forget it. Use tools like Google Search Console, security plugins, and uptime monitoring services to stay ahead of issues. At the end of the day, security isn’t a “one-and-done” thing, it’s an ongoing process. If you ignore it, you’re basically inviting attackers in. Stay on top of it, and you’ll save yourself a lot of headaches.

Building a real connection with your community isn’t just about posting updates, it’s about conversation. Ask your members about their favorite games, their dream pets, or even what brought them to your site in the first place. Treat them like friends, not just users. When people feel heard and valued, they’re way more likely to stick around, engage, and even help your community grow.

I think it all boils down how AI is being used. You have some people that are abusing AI systems by making nude videos and pictures of others, which is a serious offense. You also have those that are making fake graphic/images that make people fearful of certain situations. However, AI as a content tool and idea tool, is a great thing to do. It’s designed to empower us and improve our work flow. But there still has to be a balance in place. If the entire internet is covered with ai generated content, will the internet be okay? Probably not, it was built with humans creating and making content. If we take the entire human aspect out of websites and forums, we’ll have a major issue going on. We don’t want to see this happen. Social media sites, video places and other websites are full of ai generated concepts & it’s off putting in some aspects. The authenticity and uniqueness of the internet is what makes it a great place to be, AI is changing the entire foundation of everything. It’s the future, but we should use it to our advantage and to boast our creativity, not to fully use it to write, create & develop everything for us. That’s where the problem lies.

They have restrictions on new accounts, but generally it only lasts a week or two, sometines less. Your posts still tend to go through, you’re just temporarily shadowbanned from the platform.