521–530 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Steve Bannon, former adviser to President Trump, told The Post about the existence of the hard drive in late September and Giuliani provided The Post with a copy of it on Sunday. I want to see the raw emails.
I almost forgot that Bannon was already arrested.
To be honest it sounds like a regular end of the election craziness. To all those people, who think this is somehow special and deserves special new set of rules, I can only point to 2016 ( Comey saga that also included Guliani ). It is not special. It is not new. It is still speech. It may be lies ( and I am sure we will find out soon enough ) and I get that a lot of people can be influenced. I get it. And it still…
Our imperfect species often draws a line in the sand and says you're either on this side or that. Sometimes that line is a fucked up line and we go to war over it. And other times, we accept it (yes there are other states), internalize it and move along collectively as consciously elevated apes with a new feather in our culture-cap.
That you might not feel a sliver of moral dignity in the line that was drawn by globally dominant companies today, fighting disinformation before an election, saddens me deeply.
Like, yea, your logical brain might be short circuiting right now but can't you see the bigger issue at play?
I'm reminded of the post circulating on HN a few days ago about how FB shut down some Holocaust Denier groups, and the commentary thread just blew up about "violating free speech" etc. That really messed me up, and made me lose faith in this community.
There's a recurring argument on social media censorship that goes: "you wouldn't want the telephone company censoring phone conversations would you?" And the response is along the lines: "these are hardly private conversations, any tweet can go viral and be seen by millions". This story breaks that mold in that it involves social media censoring private conversations via DM. If you think that's OK for Twitter on its…
I really hope AT&T starts censoring these damn spam calls. I've had 5 today.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's different because it was written by a major American newspaper. Twitter should not be exercising editorial control over the news.
It could be easily argued while they are not rewriting the story they selectively choose the facts they present as "fact checked" information. In the recent past both FB and Twitter have linked to "fact checked" articles/sources that represented only the narrative they wanted you to read. If they wanted to show neutral behavior they could have linked to articles that represented both sides of an argument which would…
There's a recurring argument on social media censorship that goes: "you wouldn't want the telephone company censoring phone conversations would you?" And the response is along the lines: "these are hardly private conversations, any tweet can go viral and be seen by millions". This story breaks that mold in that it involves social media censoring private conversations via DM. If you think that's OK for Twitter on its…
The difference between the telephone company and Twitter is that the phone company was (historically) a monopoly - the only game in town . Use their wires or get lost. It required common carrier neutrality by regulation. Twitter (and every single commercial social media space) is not the above, and can do what it wants on its service. It's not a public utility.
Phone companies are natural monopolies on account of the cost of building out a physical network and network effects. Social media has similar dynamics. The only difference is there is no requisite physical layer.
We changed the URL from https://twitter.com/sohrabahmari/status/1316446749729398790 to an article with more information. If there's a more informative source, we can change it again. Edit: I've changed it from https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/facebook-twitter-block-the-pos... to what looks like it may be a more neutral source. Other users have supplied these related links: https://www.businessinsider.com/new-york-post-h…
I question if the National Review is really the best home for this story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It seems like this computer shop fellow voluntarily gave over this hard drive only after the computer in question became his property (as a result of someone not collecting the computer and not paying the bill) To say this strains credulity would be be a massive understatement.
wait though, bc i really dont see it in any of these articles: who has been hacked?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alex Jones touts a lot of nonsense but that doesn't mean the merits of what he's ranting about don't have value. Also as a comedic medium, it's an art form nobody else is doing. He isnt even indecent compared to just full of themselves types. He's just rants on hypothetical nonsense.
Strongly object to characterizing Jones as "comedic." His rallies sound like 1930's fascist speeches.[0] [0] https://youtu.be/vL8Dz4mGv1g?t=61
He's literally the Jim Cramer of conservative voices. Everybody who listens to him listens with the foresight that there can both be positive and negative repercussions depending on how much of what they say you'll believe.
Crux of the issue is that everyone knows there’s a double standard. Why do they co-ordinate to block this story and not the countless other “unverified” scoops? Because it threatens a protected politician.