Bias is demonstrated with privileged accounts. Get rid of the privileged accounts would be a good way to take care of the issue.
Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
661–670 of 1001 posts
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#662I 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.
Is it ‘pro censorship’ or pro ‘companies should have the freedom to run their company the way they want’? I don’t understand how the government enforces private companies to (re)publish content in a way that doesn’t infringe on the companies first amendment right.
You can (and I personally do!) say that Twitter should have the freedom to make censorious decisions while still encouraging them not to do it. It's like saying "everyone should eat healthy meals" - that doesn't mean the government should force them to!
So if someone takes the extra step and says they endorse Twitter's actions here, I think it's fair to call that pro censorship.
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#663Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can answer this one - 1) Old school free speech advocate, changed positions since 2) Had to figure this out practically, so not just theory crafting. Context: Part of a mod team for a forum, and we were torn between ideals of free speech and what was actually happening on the forum. Important note, moderation may be the main service the internet/SM platforms sell - curation, removal of trolls, the cleaning and keep…
You're not describing free speech, you're describing the challenges of moderation.
Thank you, I’m great full for the input. Yes. Moderation is needed for free speech to work. Without it, the effective exchange of ideas breaks down because the communication medium happily amplifies noise.
Viral and malformed ideas will beat facts every time. Counter speech fails.
Moderation is what FB/twitter are doing.
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#664Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's 100% inline with free speech to let a given website decide what they want to publish. Even if it is a very popular website. If they make bad decisions, then people can go to competitors; it's as easy as typing in a different URL. That's how the Internet--and open societies in general--are supposed to work. What it looks like to me--someone who has been on the Internet since before the turn of the century--is tha…
Scale makes a difference. These social networks are no longer just a small private website serving a local community but a critical communications medium. When they can influence billions and shape elections, it's time to seriously review their power. This is how we treat ISPs and phone providers today, and social networks of a certain size should be considered in the same class.
When they can influence billions and shape elections, it's time to seriously review their power.
Yeah, but it seems like FB and Twitter have been reviewing their power over the last four years.
They looked at the power of trolling-network, botnets etc to the influence elections. They basically triggered a circuit-breaker when a heavy hit-piece hit their networks.
Which is to say "the power of social networks" isn't just the power of the owners of the networks but also the power of groups embedded in the networks. Should these providers be fair brockers for all kind of manipulated viral content as well as for individual positions? Should they use their position of the ultimate kill switch to be the ultimate authority? I don't know but I don't think you put the most recent events as Facebook versus Organic Content - it's more Facebook versus Rupert Murdoch.
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#665I 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.
New technologies brought new challenges. There was no social network in the 2000s and before. No retweet button, no "curated" timeline that showed you what you "like". YouTube did not try to push more videos like the ones you watched previously until the mid 2010s. Free speech does not have the same meaning as before. Before it just meant that you could say whatever you wanted. Now people use it implicitly to mean th…
speech is communication.
communication is between two or more people.
You seem to be misguided as to what Free Speech means.
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#666Earlier quoted context omitted.
That isn’t a credible argument. Why would Hunter Biden, whose dad is running for President, leave his laptop at a Trump-supporting discount computer repair shop without paying with (supposedly) incriminating emails on it? It’s so convoluted... it only makes sense if you wanted to fabricate cover for illegally hacking someone’s data (or more likely, modified and/or falsified data) and releasing it. As it is, the compu…
He's left valuable stuff before. He left his wallet and a crack pipe in a rental car that he returned. Some people are just forgetful. Aside from the leak, it's also not the loss that it would be for most of us. He's rich. He had some sort of iCloud backup thing (sorry not a Mac user) to restore all the data, so he wasn't missing anything. Picking up an old laptop wouldn't be worthwhile if a replacement arrived befor…
The loss is that he left (supposedly) incriminating data on a laptop. That is incredibly valuable no matter how rich he supposedly is. It's just not a credible argument.
(And again, note that the repair shop owner never saw who dropped off the laptop. He just inferred it was Hunter Biden because there was apparently a Beau Biden sticker on the laptop.)
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#667Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I believe free amplification is terrible It's exactly what they were saying at the invention of the printing press. Amplification becoming too cheap. Maybe being on the side of censorship is always being on the wrong side of history no matter the issue. Can you remember one time in history where we now like "thanks god they censor these thoughts!"?
I don't think it's comparable. If social network is the new newspaper, everyone is free to create your own newspaper. That's why I'll always defend net neutrality. But forcing a private institution to adopt a specific editorial stance, THAT'S anti-freedom. In general, we should work to promote alternative platforms, not to force the existing ones to promote what we believe is right.
How would alternate platforms work when platforms result in winner take all dynamics?
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#668I 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.
You say on HN which has highly moderated comment threads. So suppressing free speech is only ok if it’s done by unpaid volunteers (never mind that free speech as such never existed, since you still had all sorts of restrictions include libel, defamation, fire in a theater, etc kind of restrictions).
If I discovered that HN moderators were banning links to specific major news articles they didn't like, I'd find that extremely concerning. As far as I know, the HN moderators restrict only comments which are needlessly inflammatory and posts which don't have to do with the technology industry, and I'd be fine with it if Twitter or Facebook adopted similarly general policies. (I'd be a huge fan of forming some version or corner of Twitter without politics at all, frankly.)
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#669I 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.
people are strong believers that if they are in the side of "good" they can voice their opinions freely as long as they don't hurt "others opinions" note that this others opinions will change every day/months/political agenda make sense just like when Amy said "sexual preference" and the dictionary deemed it as offensive the day after. we are living in an idiocracy of the good equal to the one of the Z movie demolition man.
Also from the moment you not in this axis of the good anymore you'll be deemed nazi, fake news, banned by social media. it is crazy to see that all the newspaper took the russian collusion seriously at first (and even do it know while many investigations couldnt find it) but their first reaction to a biden article is to ban it.
We are living in a democracy of the good where the good is defined by a minority of overly violent only entitled personalities
Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims
#670The NY Post is not a serious news organization. Whatever the implication politically, this is more akin to limiting the spread of a headline like "Lizard-man found at UFO landing site." And a naked political hit job.