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

Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#241

Post by whymauri »

prudhvis wrote: post #223

I have no idea what happened during the early 2010s. I grew up during the late 90s (born in late 80s) learning about the internet and its philosophies. Allowing Free speech still is the hill I'd like to die on. But the new generation of people, even here on HN and the internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship that I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore.

>I have no idea what happened

The fundamentals of free speech are just easier to uphold when the forum (Internet) is much smaller and the participants (hacker culture, chat rooms) are more uniform. Both the size of the forum and the diversity of the participants has changed - that's what happened.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#242

Post by hnhg »

2bitencryption wrote: post #230
Tallasatree wrote: post #214

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. We've been watching this happen for a few years now, and some of us are actively paving the road.

Recently I've seen people invoking the term "slippery slope fallacy" to describe this phenomenon. It's really frustrating to see this. I think there was some stupid "list of fallacies" infographic popular on Reddit a few months back that spawned this notion that there's no such thing as a "slippery slope" and calling anything a "slippery slope" means you're wrong and your argument can be tossed out. But... that's exa…

Indeed, when done on purpose, it has another name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salami_slicing

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#243

Post by Fauntleroy »

adventured wrote: post #233
Tallasatree wrote: post #214

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. We've been watching this happen for a few years now, and some of us are actively paving the road.

It's not good intentions. The tech giants are attempting to throw an election and they don't care who knows at this point. For the 2012 election Facebook execs bragged about illegally assisting the Obama campaign by giving them practically the entire FB social graph, for free. That violates federal campaign finance laws. Nothing was done about it and you'll never get anyone on HN to go near talking about that fraud,…

How is it you're able to see this collusion with only one side, and not the other? I'm genuinely curious.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#244

Post by mc32 »

sangnoir wrote: post #185

Why is everyone ignoring @jack's official explanation for why Twitter blocked the specific link from being shared? This is the one falsifiable action Twitter clearly took. Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses. I haven't seen any reasonable arguments again…

So obviously no Wikileaks or any “sources inside the $agency with access to information” (but with no clearance to leak) cannot be published on Twitter any more, right? No guessing in who poisoned Navalni, etc... Got it!

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#245

Post by zests »

colinmhayes wrote: post #229
high_derivative wrote: post #58

Ahhh: 1. We must censor terror propaganda and child abuse to avoid harm & because it's the law 2. We must censor stormfront and the far right because it's the right thing to do 3. We must censor covid misinformation because it could kill people 4. We must selectively censor news reporting for political candidates we are aligned with because it's probably false. ---- we are here now 5. We must remove all news critical…

1. We can't censor because of slippery slope 2. Idiots elect clown because of propaganda 3. Hundreds of thousands of people die from preventable catastrophe. I don't disagree with you but this is not an acceptable answer.

Is Cuomo a clown elected by idiots who killed tens of thousands of people for his decision to have nursing homes take in COVID patients?

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#246

Post by calimac »

wesleywt wrote: post #3
uncoder0 wrote: post #2

To add to this Trump's official campaign Twitter had it's account locked this morning and a video Trump uploaded was promptly deleted. This is new information from today. The thread yesterday was about the initial wave of censorship. I posted about the new actions this morning but it got flagged as a dupe of yesterday's discussion. It was not a duplicate, Twitter has taken new action and decided to go further this mo…

Do you think its correct to delibrately spread a false story about Hunter Biden? Is this type removing false information censorship?

The guy has a crack pipe in his mouth and emails pertaining to foreign influence peddling. Before some of your heads explode please replace the name hunter Biden in the m headline with someone like Jared Cushner?

How partisan is the lease of logic?

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#247

Post by nexuist »

prudhvis wrote: post #223

I have no idea what happened during the early 2010s. I grew up during the late 90s (born in late 80s) learning about the internet and its philosophies. Allowing Free speech still is the hill I'd like to die on. But the new generation of people, even here on HN and the internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship that I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore.

I grew up in the early 2000s. I find it difficult to understand as well, but I think what happened is that emotional human contact was overrun by corporate/nation-state bots. Bots cannot be convinced that their positions are wrong; they exist solely to spread discontent and fear. This is far different than the early Internet where you could safely assume everyone you were talking to is a real person. They may be a dangerous person, but a person nonetheless. You could equally assume that their day job does not consist of demoralizing or confusing people, and their positions on the issues were a result of genuine thought and strategy rather than a built in set of beliefs meant to serve some mystery person or group's end game.

Basically, free speech only works if we have reason to believe the people holding onto the "bad" ideas in the idea marketplace listen. It stops being a solution when there are no consequences to being wrong, when your reputation doesn't matter, and when you can be as immoral or insidious as you want without a care in the world. This is the result of automation invading human spaces.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#248

Post by [deleted] »

nitrobeast wrote: post #41
convery wrote: post #17

European here, but I can definitively see how someone would come to that conclusion. Both platforms bans anyone mentioning the supposed "whistleblower" (whom actually only had newspaper articles as 'evidence'), bans anyone mentioning Bidens kid, bans anyone mentioning the death of Clintons ex-staffers, Wikileaks content related to Dems is blacklisted, and they remove videos of Bidens gaffes for being "manipulative" w…

A few things I realized in the past few years: 1. Elite class does exist in the society, and they exert tight control on the flow of information in traditional media, e.g. TV, newspapaer etc. Their control is loosened in the Internet age initially, which led to the rise of Trump. Trying to correct this, a narrative of blaming "fake news" was used to pressure leading companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter to toe…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#249

Post by colordrops »

senthil_rajasek wrote: post #240
prudhvis wrote: post #223

I have no idea what happened during the early 2010s. I grew up during the late 90s (born in late 80s) learning about the internet and its philosophies. Allowing Free speech still is the hill I'd like to die on. But the new generation of people, even here on HN and the internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship that I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore.

It didn't happen overnight. 2016 U.S elections changed things a lot. Spreading misinformation is not free speech.

Yes, it is.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#250

Post by andrew_ »

senthil_rajasek wrote: post #240
prudhvis wrote: post #223

I have no idea what happened during the early 2010s. I grew up during the late 90s (born in late 80s) learning about the internet and its philosophies. Allowing Free speech still is the hill I'd like to die on. But the new generation of people, even here on HN and the internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship that I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore.

It didn't happen overnight. 2016 U.S elections changed things a lot. Spreading misinformation is not free speech.

What? It absolutely is. A lie is covered under free speech. One can say anything under that doctrine.
Post reply on HN