Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

news.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 281 posts

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#141

Post by shadowgovt »

manigandham wrote: post #117
Apocryphon wrote: post #115

Back in the '90s, when you entered AOL Instant Messenger chatrooms there was always disclaimers saying that certain content (swearing, hate speech, sexual material, etc.) were subject to be filtered out, or would cause you to be kicked. Message boards and forums have always had moderators and admins who could censor at will. You're posting on one right now. Can anyone explain how Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, etc. is q…

The scale. These major platforms are becoming increasingly dominant forms of communication and mediums of expression. There's a real question about when they cease being just another website or chatroom and become a public utility.

I don't think the scale argument holds water, because back in the days of AOL, AOL had, by percentage, about as much control over what mainstream user saw as Twitter and Facebook.

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#142

Post by shadowgovt »

stevebmark wrote: post #31
YarickR2 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

This is an example of the intellectually dishonest juggling act I'm talking about.

Agreed, for starters, nobody's using shortwave jammers. The rest of the internet is right on the other side of the wall.

Hell, people used to criticize these walled gardens. when did the argument change to the gardener shouldn't have control of the garden instead of free thinking people shouldn't let themselves be trapped behind a wall?

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#143

Post by shadowgovt »

skindoe wrote: post #22
yladiz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who determines what is hateful? In this case, Twitter.

Sounds Orwellian

It's not because there are alternatives.

People keep forgetting that 1984 assumes a singular authoritarian control, not multiple authorities and the freedom to choose one, several, or none of them.

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#144

Post by shadowgovt »

skindoe wrote: post #53
exogeny wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good thing many alternatives exist!

What if Google and Twitter deside that those "alternatives" are hateful for disagreeing politically and stop linking them on their platforms making it extremely difficult/impossible to find them?

Then people can type in domain names directly. This isn't a hard problem to solve.

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#145

Post by soneil »

shadowgovt wrote: post #141
manigandham wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The scale. These major platforms are becoming increasingly dominant forms of communication and mediums of expression. There's a real question about when they cease being just another website or chatroom and become a public utility.

I don't think the scale argument holds water, because back in the days of AOL, AOL had, by percentage, about as much control over what mainstream user saw as Twitter and Facebook.

I don't recall seeing AOL chatrooms quoted in mainstream news on a regular basis. They may have had a sizeable percentage of the online audience, but it's the "online audience" that's greatly inflated in scale.

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#146

Post by AndrewBissell »

some1else wrote: post #111

Facebook hate groups don't need Twitter accounts to operate. Regardless of the presumably positive outcome for the mainstream timeline, this is likely a futile whack-a-mole move that only benefits Twitter. Hate groups organize in private and output the vitriol with whichever fake accounts they have in possession. The way to definitively solve this societal problem is to help the people caught in the self-radicalisati…

The comparison to hate groups is a little off the mark. QAnon doesn't organize in secret, and so far you're not likely to get fired if someone shows a picture of you wearing a Q shirt to your employer. That said I agree with the broader point that this may not do that much to inhibit QAnon, especially because it exhibits a lot of cultlike belief that might just be reinforced by this ban.

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#147

Post by MBCook »

rbecker wrote: post #60
stevebmark wrote: post #11

It's been encouraging to see companies grow a backbone and crack down on harassment and hate campaigns, and not hide behind cowardly cries of "free speech." Twitter has taken too much time to do this, but recently they've been doing it more. Even Reddit, notorious for powering and consciously allowing hate campaigns, has cracked down more. It's also been interesting that the proponents of allowing these campaigns to…

> It's been encouraging to see companies grow a backbone and crack down on harassment and hate campaigns Grow a backbone, or fold to public pressure?

So the public shouldn’t be able to apply pressure against companies supporting hate groups?

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#148

Post by auganov »

Kednicma wrote: post #98
codeddesign wrote: post #38

I’d like to see Antifa added to this growing list as well. The article states this group has “ties to dangerous real-world activities”. Does anyone know of any? Or is this just conjecture? The article’s statement was fairly vague.

As an antifascist, I'd like to list some things [0] which I haven't done and which I do not imagine are parts of healthy antifascism, but which I can understand that Twitter might ban folks for encouraging or doing: * Doxxing * Brandishing weapons in a family restaurant [1] * Targeting journalists for violence * Targeting public figures who have been accused of crimes for violence [2] * Targeting politicians for viol…

Willem Van Spronsen who firebombed an ICE facility was a self described antifa [0]

Connor Betts who shot 9 people dead was an antifa sympathizer [1]

James T. Hodgkinson who hurt two officers and wounded Republican Rep. Scalise in a shootout was found to have posted a lot of content comparing President Trump and the Republican party to Nazis [2]. An idea that has been popularized by antifa elements.

[0] https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/briannasacks/ice-detent...

[1] https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/08/07/dayton-shootin...

[2] http://jewishbreakingnews.com/2017/06/14/breaking-shooter-id...

Re: Twitter bans 7k QAnon accounts, limits 150k others as part of broad crackdown

#149

Post by MBCook »

vecinu wrote: post #55

Can anyone explain what is happening with the downvotes on this post? Almost every single top level comment has been downvoted to almost disappearing.

There is a large contingent on HM that doesn’t seem to want to discuss anything that’s related to politics in the smallest way, no matter how directly on topic it is for technology.

So you’ll find stories like this one that should be pretty high up which have been flagged to death and no longer appear on the main page.

Post reply on HN