Live data from Hacker News

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

bbc.com

251–260 of 1001 posts

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

#251

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 just want to tell you that you're not alone in this. It's seriously unsettling to me to see the way in which this culture has changed.

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

#252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter adopted this policy because they know that progressives are more likely to be compromised by leaked information

...are you suggesting that progressives have more "dirty laundry" than conservatives in general? Or that conservatives are more likely to dox people?

Or that conservatives tend to be older and less likely to use technology for storing sensitive photos

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

#253

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 da…

So make political bots illegal and the world becomes sane again?

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

#254

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.

> Allowing Free speech still is the hill I'd like to die on

At this rate it will be the hill that the civilization dies on. The whole "absolute free speech is a sacrosanct human rights for everyone" is an ideal that simply would not scale with the 21st century civilization. Most users around here grew up firmly believing that value, and it is further reinforced by American/Western exceptionalism, so I can see how this comment will be very negatively received.

But we can all agree that freedom isn't free, at one point in the future the cost would be so high that the whole civilization would be facing a "give me freedom or give me death" moment. I can't predict whether that moment will come in the form of an anti-science misinformation campaign during a pandemic that is far more serious than even Covid or a mentally deranged, conspiracy theory supporting leader who has full control of the nuclear arsenal, but that moment will come one day.

The second law of thermal dynamics applies to more than just physical systems, entropy also plays similar role in a complex society that is getting ever more complex. Before our species can attain the ability to modularize our own society through interplanetary colonization to ensure survival, we have to face the very uncomfortable truth that we have to put in more rules and checks into our existing society to ensure the entropy doesn't snowball out of control too fast. That means we have to put everything on the table and re-exam all of our values, because there is no value to speak of in a dead world.

The unfortunate thing is it's very difficult to have this conversation, even with very intelligent people, without everyone getting emotional. After all a lot of these beliefs and values are something we hold very dear, and maybe that is the ultimate tragedy of our world.

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

#255

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.

The "unchecked misinformation" alternative hasn't really been working out so well either, for what it's worth.

I don't think it's working nearly as badly as you think.

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

#256

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…

I wouldn't mind the policy if it was enforced equally.

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

#257

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.

HN hasn't change. It's always been this way since it first started. Even in the 90s, "censorship" like what we see today happened. The actions haven't changed. The scope is what is different. Instead of affected a few hundred people, it's now affecting hundreds of thousands of people, if not millions.

> internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship

I don't see that having changed. Obviously I don't know the specific people you are thinking of, but judging by your comment here and the timeline you are mentioning, I don't see much as change beyond scope.

Honestly, if people think people are becoming pro-censorship, I think it's more a case of ignoring everything that was happening before.

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

#258

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.

The "unchecked misinformation" alternative hasn't really been working out so well either, for what it's worth.

Hits and misses. It worked great for Galileo.

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

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this constitute hacking? The repair shop almost certainly retains ownership of unclaimed deviced after some period of time. The shop owns the laptop. The data is theirs to do with as they please and they chose to publish it (at least, that's the story). No hacking necessary.

> The data is theirs to do with as they please. No hacking necessary. I'd love to see the jurisprudence on this. If there are any photos, do they also get the copyrights? Can they share any nudes they find? How about that Adobe license? As a non-lawyer, it is clear that owning the medium doesn't mean you own the information on it (or the cloud wouldn't be a thing). If we agree on that, then logically, it is possible…

The nudes isn't even hypothetical - reportedly the data included intimate videos.

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

#260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea that Twitter and Facebook can do this in a “non-distortionary” way is unrealistic. Peoples’ personal biases are too strong. The “fact check” websites used to be great. Now, they wander way over “fact checking.” The worst abuses are when they provide “context” or challenge assumptions. Conservatives and liberals are not working from the same assumptions, and have a different set of contextual facts top of min…

I don't think it's the sites wandering that's the problem; it's that they're all inexorably pulled from being color commenters to being refs, and once they become refs, people start to work them. It's hard to think of a way you could run a fact checking site without this dynamic playing out, because the better you are, the more people will depend on you as a referee.

How can a site that calls itself a fact checking site possibly be called a color commenter?
Post reply on HN