Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

text.npr.org

821–830 of 889 posts

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm about as close to a free-speech absolutist as there is, and it's very frustrating that the market for these platforms seems to be settling into ruts where we have to choose between the hyper-conformity of highly managed platforms and the dumpster fires of the unmanaged platforms. I think the feedback loop you describe is a big part of it. I also wonder if we're experiencing a decline in education and critical thi…

There can, I’m surprised no one has implemented this: Start everyone off with a maximum influence credit of say 10 people, like in your local neighborhood. As you contribute to thoughtful discussion, as determined by the diversity and ratio of up/down arrows, your maximum influence credit grows as a function of your geography.

> There can, I’m surprised no one has implemented this:

The reason is you're inappropriately applying an technical solution to a social problem.

You also make at least one critical error:

> As you contribute to thoughtful discussion, as determined by the diversity and ratio of up/down arrows

Upvotes/downvotes pretty much never measure "thoughtfulness," because for them to do so would require a level of social cohesion that would probably make upvotes/downvote unnecessary.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#822
post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My 11 year old, never posted, seldom used twitter account was suspended last month unless and until I provide my telephone number

I suspect they do this to stem the use of abandoned accounts by bad actors. Emphasis on "suspect" because I don't have a Twitter account or look at tweets unless someone else links to them, and then invariably I still can't see them because I get an error message.

If you are using FF it's a known issue. You just have to clear your cache with `Shift+Ctrl+R`

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#823

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Every forum needs human moderation, but that doesn't imply that this moderation cannot be done in good or bad faith. Just like a good judge is not congruent to a big, deterministic computer.

So you're saying you believe Parler to be moderating in better faith than Twitter/Facebook/etc? 'cause I think for your statement to be relevant that would have to be the assertion...

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds nice, but obviously that “amicable divorce” is extremely difficult to imagine.

The UK is in the process of a nonviolent divorce with Brexit.

The EU has an explicit process for members to leave nonviolently. The United States has, well, one example of an extreme opposite of that.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#825
post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. Well I guess that's the problem. It's hard to have a forum with productive conversations if you aren't willing to filter out "noise", but not everyone agrees with what the noise is. But one could argue (and I'm not arguing that it's the case here), one could have different rules around what's allowed versus Twitter, and it could be a more open forum, but still censored (trolls, deaths threats, "f k you" posts).

I'm happy enough with banning things you have to ban legally and banning pointless comments. But banning anyone supporting antifa is a pretty clear breach. The parody ban (especially the selective application) is another clear breach of free speech. I'd be content enough if they were upfront and said this is a place for "Conservative opinions only" rather than "free speech". I'd even agree that's their right and that…

Here's an argument:

Each social media site imposes its own filter bubble.

If you combine together a bunch of social media sites for consumption, you hit more different bubbles, and thus get more variety in the speach.

Adding new sites with different rulesets then makes freer speach on the whole, even though each platform is not very free on its own

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#826
post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I use Twitter quite a bit and there's no politics on it. Sure. It does depend on who you follow and if you choose to click on things so again it is my original sin to try to have productive conversations... so yes, if I choose to put myself in a bubble on twitter, I probably wouldn't see that stuff... but I tend to click on articles or discussions on any social media. I "try" to use it as intended. Just look up "may…

Sure, I don't want to convince you to use a tool or not use a tool because we each must make that decision for ourselves. If you would find yourself searching Twitter for "mayos", "yts", or "white people", then I can see why you don't enjoy it and I can see why you don't want to use Twitter. That's a very reasonable decision. I just wanted you to have the information that there are certain ways to use the tool to get…

Perfectly understandable.

Nah I know I could get away with "unfollowing" certain people. I mean, eventually people will post new articles and I would click on them and be met with that vitriol. Mostly because I followed a lot of business related accounts and it seems like if any of those get picked up by the "general population" of twitter its open season on anyone that feels business/capitalism/startups aren't pure evil.

I do get your point though, it wasn't lost on me. I might give it another shot eventually.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was banned from r/conservative in a discussion about trump handling the coronavirus seriously. I posted a timeline of quotes from him "only 15 cases soon to be none etc" indicating he had not taken it seriously early. Banned after that. Which is fine, I feel that people should be free to form any clubs/groups they want.

At some point we'll need to deal with the fact that the clubs self-reinforce any beliefs the tribe wants to put forward, and isolate them further from society, creating true problems for actually running said society. At some point we'll need to have a psychological nuclear weapon disarmament... the question is when and how, not if.

The big dilemma is which rules should be written to make sure that republicans are deradicalized by democrat information, without democrats having to be traumatized by propaganda from the cesspools of the republicans, isn't it?

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#828

In mid October I deleted almost all my tweets and likes (but Twitter being so shit they are still showing my likes except it’s not liked anymore lol) and have not been tweeting anything anymore. I found Twitter too toxic, it made me angry with people for no reason, so I deleted all my tweets and the app. No more notifications, no more “just checking Twitter quickly”. I now go to Twitter like once a day just to have a…

I've long held the opinion that Twitter and Facebook are just content in the medium, a bit like complaining about Sky, CNN or Fox on TV without looking at television itself and the impact it had on communication. The internet has brought communication to everyone that travels at incredible speed. This has the effect of causing emotive responses, rather than reasoned. Requires no effort at all to respond, and encourag…

The Internet just taps into the primal (that is, of primate) instincts of humans. We're just a bunch of apes with technology, and the Internet is just a conduit for our lackluster emotional brains to connect to each other.

There is no way around it because humans are deeply emotionally flawed, and these flaws are amplified by our technology. No amount of technology will fix it, as it will just be another catalyst.

Looking elsewhere in the branches of life for intelligence, such as octopuses, whales, in particular orcas, and elephants, we see different types. Are they more or less emotional? The communal spirit of elephants and that of orcas, the latter of which showcase particularly striking examples of cooperation, does make you wonder. But then it again, it makes you wonder if all higher forms of intelligence lead you to take advantage of a greater amount of situations and why we even bother trying to establish ourselves out there for other intelligent lifeforms to find.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#829
post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking HN threads into nationalistic flamewar and adding personal swipes will get you banned here. If you keep posting like this we are going to have to ban you again, so please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules going forward.

What is nationalistic about this? I'm just stating a fact. I'm not even american. What is a personal swipe? https://www.google.com/search?q=personal+swipes

Getting into which is "the most attractive country on earth" is nationalistically baity, and "what are you talking about" is an internet swipe.

More precisely, if you say that in an internet comment, the default is that it comes across as a personal swipe, for example as a judgment of incoherence. If you actually mean that you would like to understand the other person better, that needs to be expressed more explicitly, in a way that disambiguates from the internet default.

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#830

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious: how does one know such things? Is there no possibility that you may be somewhat mistaken? Note: - your first statement references the entirety of HN; it is plausibly likely that you have not consumed (and comprehensively perceived with complete accuracy , and remembered) the entirety of forum discussions on HN - your second statement involves events in the future - as far as I know, the ability to accura…

"precisely zero" was an exaggeration to be sure, but it's rather close to reality. Look up a Fermi problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem That's a good place to start with these kinds of questions. I figure this is true simply because of the remarkably low population of Hacker News compared to society at large; there's simply not enough people here for changes to this specific site to make an impact on…

To review, the question was:

>>> How do we get back from where we are now? I have to admit, my social skills are lacking, my patience is low; and the problem just seems so vastly overwhelming that I can't imagine where to even begin.

I suggested a novel idea:

>> I suggest that we fully acknowledge in comprehensive, "dimensional & behavioural complexity", that which lies at the bottom of all of these problems: the human mind.

>> And then, to ensure that all that hard work does not go to waste, modify the HN guidelines (or, introduce a brand new, experimental mode that includes these modified guidelines, to be used when discussing culture-war topics) such that ignoring this aspect of reality is explicitly forbidden.

What I meant by the root problem being the human mind, is this commonly recurring issue where people make stuff up, and assert it as fact.

And lo and behold, observe the response.

> Look up a Fermi problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_problem

Ok...

> In [physics or engineering education], a Fermi problem, Fermi quiz, Fermi question, Fermi estimate, order-of-magnitude problem, order-of-magnitude estimate, or order estimation is an estimation problem designed to teach dimensional analysis or approximation of [extreme scientific calculations], and such a problem is usually a back-of-the-envelope calculation.

> Example questions given by the official Fermi Competition:

> "If the mass of one teaspoon of water could be converted entirely into energy in the form of heat, what volume of water, initially at room temperature, could it bring to a boil? (litres).", "How much does the Thames River heat up in going over the Fanshawe Dam? (Celsius degrees).", "What is the mass of all the automobiles scrapped in North America this month? (kilograms)" [2][3], Possibly the most famous Fermi Question is the Drake equation, which seeks to estimate the number of intelligent civilizations in the galaxy. The basic question of why, if there were a significant number of such civilizations, ours has never encountered any others is called the Fermi paradox.[4]

These are pretty extreme, needle in a haystack class problems. Funny thing though: I seem to be able to find "needles in a haystack" on HN with about 75% of my comments. This is suggestive that perhaps these needles may not actually be as rare as you perceive, and claim (with evidence that consists of nothing but rhetoric).

> I figure this is true simply because of the remarkably low population of Hacker News compared to society at large; there's simply not enough people here for changes to this specific site to make an impact on the larger social media ecosystem.

My thinking is that if one group of people could learn how to have honest(!), non-imagination-presented-as-fact based discussions about the nature of reality (which includes massive amounts of unknown variables), something no other social media site (or perhaps even individual human being) that I know of seems to be able to accomplish in the year 2020, perhaps this knowledge could be shared to other subreddits, and we could get some sort of a grassroots anti-delusion movement underway. I know of several subreddits that have been trying different things to get people to stop fighting, I doubt they'd turn their nose up at a technique with a proven track record.

> To be more realistic, I'll estimate that getting the social media platform Hacker News exactly perfect from a systemic standpoint might have an impact on around 0.001% of the societal social media problem. We've then got 99.999% more to impact.

More imagination-based numbers, with no concern for the details of the underlying idea, or what might actually be possible. No concern or intent to improve the world. Must. Win. Argument. Must. Support. Tribe.

> And if you believe that people reading Hacker News are somehow more influential to society than the average social media user or something... well, we would not then have that belief in common.

Alternatively, you could consider the possibility that you are not omniscient, and that someone you disagree with may actually have a valid point.

Post reply on HN