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

871–880 of 1001 posts

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

#871

Post by sakopov »

zucked wrote: post #355
adventured wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

You gonna cite some of these outlandish claims? Particularly interested in: > The media ran every possible baseless story they could about Trump the past four years, often with zero supporting evidence to the story in question. Every time they turned out to be fake stories, the media conveniently ignored it, refused to run retractions and moved on to the next fraudulent story. >You've got people inside of these compa…

Here you go. [1]

[1] https://theintercept.com/2019/01/20/beyond-buzzfeed-the-10-w...

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

#872

Post by m0zg »

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…

> this material was hacked

False. Laptop became the property of the repair shop when nobody paid the bill or turned up to pick it up.

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

#873

Post by xg15 »

NeverFade wrote: post #780
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…

There's no evidence that any actual hacking took place to obtain the Biden emails. The article stated that they were obtained from a laptop negligently left at a repair shop. Twitter just decided to claim that the post is lying, with no evidence and no fact-checking, and then banned the Post Twitter account and every other account that shared the article. At the same time, they allow content like the Panama Papers, P…

If you consider the Snowden leaks the result of "hacking" but the current leaks not, what exactly is your definition of "hacking"?

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

#874

Post by m0zg »

seppin wrote: post #799
qqqwerty wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a good explanation of what likely happened[1]. The laptop shows up at this repair shop in early 2019, and the shop owner "declared that because he is legally blind, he could not identify the person who brought it in". Supposedly, this blind shop owner then gains access to the computer (doesn't say how, was it unprotected?) and it contains lewd videos of Hunter (again, blind shop owner). So he copies the drive…

Hunter Biden's iCloud backup was hacked, which isn't too hard. Combine those real photos with some real (and some fake) emails the GRU hacked from Burisma last year, you have a ready-made "October surprise". The degree in which you "fall for it" is the degree in which you want to see Trump reelected. No one that could fog a mirror would normally believe such nonsense.

The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop (or really repair shop owner's, since he didn't pick it up or pay the $85 repair bill) since December of last year. This should be fairly easy to corroborate. That's why we aren't hearing on-the-record denials. There's a lot more where that came from, and it's likely real.

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

#876

Post by jmnicolas »

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 during the early 2010s.

Web monopolies happened.

The more a platform has members (including HN) the harder it gets to have meaningful conversations.

Then come the rules.

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

#877

Post by therealdrag0 »

remarkEon wrote: post #861
rch wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not following the details of the story, but has anyone suggested that Hunter dropped off the laptop himself? Stealing a laptop and causing a bit of damage to initiate a costly repair, then leaving it with a shop under an assumed name seems like a solid Mitnick-level hack to me.

I think the most likely scenario is that he went on a bender (he has well known substance abuse problems) and locked himself out, dropped it off to get it fixed, and forgot about it. This seems much more plausible than some of the other extremely complex theories which assume that, ahem, Rudy Gulianni (of all people) was able to plan a years long scam to procure this particular computer.

Is there any evidence the computer is legit? The only indisputable thing is the photos right? And those could have been hacked from anywhere. Or am I missing something? (I haven’t studied it much)

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

#878

Post by 75dvtwin »

rdiddly wrote: post #674

As a former New Yorker the thing I can't wrap my head around is how the Post ("Headless Body in Topless Bar") is now apparently being referred to as a respectable publication.

Ok, as a former New Yorker, what do you think about this explanation of the outrage with the behaviour of social networks executives:

https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/if-unreliable-is-the-issue-why...

?

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

#879

Post by ImaCake »

75dvtwin wrote: post #841
inglor_cz wrote: post #172

This is the Streisand effect in practice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect Here in Czechia we mostly concentrate on our outrageous Covid numbers of late, but this story about Twitter pulling down a NY Post article made it through into our local news. If it stayed up, no one would have cared enough to write about it.

Well, I think you underestimate the gravity of this. A thoroughly corrupt money laundering Biden family machine (which also involves children of other previously high profile politicians) -- may become the presidential family of US. And the social networks in the country, have chosen to do what they have always done with anti-left news -- they censored them. My view, make the execs accountable now. They have to be on…

I don't see how it is big news that both sides of American politics are profoundly corrupt. If I were American (thankfully I am not) I would be thinking about the upcoming election as a choice between a corrupt arsehole whose rhetoric does not move your country towards a race war, or a corrupt arsehole whose rhetoric does move your country towards a race war.

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

#880

Post by donmcronald »

frankzen wrote: post #760

They're a publisher that edits content, plain and simple. Take away the platform status and let them play by the same rules as other publishers.

I think that would entrench the current tech giants because the liability to any startup entering the space would be huge and they wouldn't be big enough to partner with anyone.

On the flipside, you'd have Facebook, Twitter, etc. partnering with media companies big enough to negotiate an indemnification clause into a contract that allows them into the recommendations engine(s).

As soon as you start forcing liability onto those platforms, the content is instantly going to morph so it only includes "safe" publishers. The ToS will get updated so regular people agree to indemnification via forced arbitration and you'll only be able to post content that's widely seen if you're verified.

TLDR; It would be Digg v4, but mandated by the government.

Also, a lot of the current content is created by companies that are already considered publishers and nothing happens to them when they publish misleading news. So how does considering Twitter the publisher instead of Fox or CNN improve that?

IMHO the big media companies would love to see some type of alternate publisher label affixed to big tech because it would detriment big tech to the benefit of big media.

Post reply on HN