Or, and here's a revolutionary thought, we teach people to think before they open their goddamn idiot pieholes?
Impossible, I know, but still a goal worth aiming at.
Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
91–100 of 121 posts
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#92Clicked a couple of items - only metadata is available, other items are "access restricted". I wonder how it works.
[deleted]
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#93Basically people should be posting anonymously on the internet (via distinct handles with no connection with one's real name), as is done in Hacker News (although a small percent do post enough details in their posts to connect with their real name). Lots of us started out posting with our real names in the last century (on Usenet for example) and after a while realized how poor an idea this was.
For the most part, if I don't want something linked to my name, I don't write it.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#94A good reminder not to put things on other people's computers if you don't want these things to be on other people's computers.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#95Is this really necessary? People need to be careful what they post online, but come on. Do they really need to archive every tweet? Seems like they are taking their mission too far. Archiving every post from Usenet dating channels from 20+ years, every tweet, etc. Seems a bit excessive at this point. This also can’t help with the social cooling.
Whether or not every tweet in existence should be archived is irrelevant. The fact is they can be, so they should be treated as though they will be. Saying "no please don't" will never stop something that is technologically possible from happening. Murphy's law applies here and everywhere in tech (and frankly, in most areas of life).
Even if obtaining old tweets was theoretically always possible, actually facilitating this seems like a combination of poor judgment and obsessive hoarding.
If the "smattering of tweets" means everyone's tweets will be publicly available in perpetuity, then this is a downright inhumane policy, and should not be pursued by any organization worthy of respect.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
If 10 people follow you, then you are talking with family, not broadcasting to a nation, in practice. The audience can change when years pass.
Misunderstanding the medium doesn't change what it is, practically speaking.
Humans aren't perfectly informed and sometimes they make mistakes.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#97Of course this will get weaponized, if it isn't already. We've seen time and time again that a vile old tweet in the wrong hands can be very powerful, it's a ticking time bomb. Think 5 or even 10+ years down the road, some of the kids who are edgy on twitter today might go in to politics or hold some other high level position. I don't think the current climate is going to cool down anytime soon, but maybe something l…
But the root of the problem is not the technology, it is the people and the culture. I have no doubt, using tweets to cancel people is a deliberate tactic of the far left activists to win the culture war. And they are winning, a lot. After a few more decades, cancel the First Amendment and put people in prison bc of wrong speech is not impossible. Right now the focus is race, gender, identity politics, but it can be…
although I hate the aspect of cancel culture where someone's tweets from several years ago are pulled up to destroy their career, I think a lot of the stuff around race, gender, ect. is headed in the right direction. We are at a point where hating on an group of people is simply not o.k. and I think the repercussion are fair (although it is socially acceptable right now to hate on white people, I view this as an overcorrection that will go away soon)
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
This opinion always reads to me as: "I want to be able to speak in public without fear of consequence." That's never been the case and I don't know why anybody thinks it ever has. Digital technology created infallible memory, to be sure, but memory isn't a new thing.
The bigger issue is most of us said/did dumb shit 20+ years ago, but luckily there was no widespread put everything on the internet movement so we get judged by how we are now, not how we was as kids. While I agree people should be held responsible for things they say/do, I also think that at this exact moment in history, people give little to no thought to the idea that people change/grow as they age. Just look at J…
Agreed! I don’t even know stuff is wrong or insensitive sometimes. Someone recently told me not to say the word “Jew.” I wasn’t saying it in a bad way - we were discussing a friend who is Jewish, but I didn’t know just saying the word “Jew” could possibly be taken badly.
When I was younger, I said something about a “Jap.” I honestly was just trying to take a shortcut by saying Jap instead of the full “Japanese” like saying burger instead of hamburger. I got a shock when I was told that was bad.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#99Is this really necessary? People need to be careful what they post online, but come on. Do they really need to archive every tweet? Seems like they are taking their mission too far. Archiving every post from Usenet dating channels from 20+ years, every tweet, etc. Seems a bit excessive at this point. This also can’t help with the social cooling.
Whether or not every tweet in existence should be archived is irrelevant. The fact is they can be, so they should be treated as though they will be. Saying "no please don't" will never stop something that is technologically possible from happening. Murphy's law applies here and everywhere in tech (and frankly, in most areas of life).
Thank you for articulating this. I was trying to, and failing miserably.
Re: Archive Team: A Smattering of Tweets
#100This is a bit tangential, but I wish we weren’t seeing links to tweets showing up as hn stories. It’s not a legitimate news source, and it bans people left and right for nothing because they have such serious botting and conspiracy theory problems
HN isn't just for discussing "legitimate news sources" (whatever that even means). People can post anything they want from any source.
You can’t say anything of substance in 280 characters, or find room to cite references. It’s just a bunch of disembodied statements meant to go viral to build peoples followings or get people mad, with no meaningful discussion back and forth (for the same reasons). Maybe I’m just getting old, but Twitter seems like a bad way to get and share information, even without the random bans. Apologies if I just haven’t seen the good parts of Twitter yet