Coffee With Scott Adams — Knowledge Archive May 24, 2026
Scott Adams Philosophy Archive
Search ideas

Context —

longer just good at stuff, just good at basic stuff. Now I don't think it's all a diversity hiring situation. There's also something about young people. If you took a 16-year-old from my generation, you would think that they were 25 today. Do you realize that? Right? A 16-year-old from my generation, if you just introduced them into the modern world, people would think they were 25 because they w…

← Previous segment →

ing. You might have the same experience. You're going to say, when was the date of the story? Did we not already go through this? How could we possibly be talking about this today?

Here's the story. Twitter just found another shadow ban algorithm that they hadn't found before. There was actually something that was suppressing you if you got a number of complaints from other Twitter users. You would be suppressed, but you wouldn't know it. Do you know who was also suppressed? Elon Musk. That's right. Because Elon Musk has the kind of account — because it's the biggest, famous account — he's going to get a lot of people complaining about him, just protest complaints.

So the actual owner of Twitter, unbeknownst to himself, was banning himself. That's a real thing. Musk was shadow banning himself accidentally. He didn't know it because Twitter still had an algorithm that was banning people like him, people who get complaints. Now I get it. And Elon Musk confirmed this. Musk actually confirmed it.

Now doesn't that make you feel like, wait a minute, isn't this a repeat? I thought they went in there and they tore out by the roots all of those bad algorithms, and it was full transparency, told us what he was doing, which I love. And I love this too. I love the fact that this is full transparency. We just found this thing. This is what it did, and we're trying to get rid of it. I love that kind of mistake, you know, because it's a mistake that it exists. You could argue it's a mistake that they didn't find it till now. But I love the fact that once they found it, it was full disclosure, and then we're going to go fix it. So that part, A plus.

You know, I say this all the time, but I think it's always worth repeating. If you judge people by their mistakes, you could have a very sad life, because everybody makes mistakes, including you. But if you judge people by how they respond to their mistakes, in this case you could call that a mistake that that algorithm still existed, but the way they handled it, A plus. So that's my final grade. My final grade is A plus, because I care about how you handled it. I don't care that it was there. I mean, I care, but I'm not going to judge anybody for it.

All right. I'm going to make a further prediction that there will be some point in the maybe near future in which Twitter will discover that the tweaking of these algorithms was available to people on the outside, meaning that there was probably at least somebody somewhere who could actually dial in — I'll say dial in, use the old term — who could just dial into Twitter and tweak the algorithm any way they wanted. Probably an intelligence agency. Probably an intelligence

Context —

agency. Now it could be that they just had an insider who would do it for them, which would look the same. I'm not saying they necessarily could hack the system or that they had a back door, which is possible. They just might have an insider who could do it for them. Makes you wonder how many other suppression algorithms are in the code. Now I would like to once again claim the best prediction a…

Next segment → →