Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

fanbyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 577 posts

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#421

Post by dqpb »

TameAntelope wrote: post #345

> Here’s the thing: I’m a stinker. Even at my jolliest, if someone figuratively shoulder-checks me, I’m probably going to make so many mountains out of this molehill that I will adjust the topography of the United States significantly. I’m sorry, but this is your real problem, not Twitter banning you. This is called “pride” and is historically recognized as one of the largest “problem creators” as far as emotions go.…

> I’m sorry, but this is your real problem, not Twitter banning you.

I’m sorry, but no it’s not.

This is called treating the cause instead of the symptom. More people should do it.

The alternative is to acquiesce to the false moral superiority of those in control.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#422

Post by jjulius »

rglullis wrote: post #231
OrangeMonkey wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was uncalled for man.

Why is it ok to collectively hate bankers, people working in big tobacco, salesmen in big pharma and many other industries that we know for being damaging to society, but when it comes to Big Tech we suddenly think "it is uncalled for"? Facebook is a deplorable company and its leadership is known to have a completely broken moral compass. But why should we hold only the leadership accountable? It is the developers, t…

I think it's a stretch to say that most people hate every single person working in those industries.

We don't hate the tellers, we hate the people running the banks and fucking around with our money. We don't shit on Amazon warehouse employees, we shit on the people making their lives hell. In a similar sense, we don't know what this person's role was as a software engineer. It's one thing to discuss the morality of their employer with them, it's another thing to go straight for their jugular and write them out of society entirely just because their resume says, "Facebook".

And, as I said in this same comment chain, I am incredibly "Fuck Facebook" as a whole.

It would be great if every single person had the luxury of making employment decisions primarily based on moral code. The reality of life demonstrates that that is not always viable for everyone.

Edit: Do we assume that all Starbucks employees, even the ones trying to unionize, are anti-union because that's the corporate stance?

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#423

Post by dqpb »

philipswood wrote: post #358
teawrecks wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the clear path?

"you cannot be unsuspended until either they agree your appeal is correct (which it is), you give up your appeal (never), and/or delete the offending tweet." Delete the offending tweet.

Impossible for someone with a spine.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#424

Post by jjulius »

actually_a_dog wrote: post #315
rglullis wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it ok to collectively hate bankers, people working in big tobacco, salesmen in big pharma and many other industries that we know for being damaging to society, but when it comes to Big Tech we suddenly think "it is uncalled for"? Facebook is a deplorable company and its leadership is known to have a completely broken moral compass. But why should we hold only the leadership accountable? It is the developers, t…

I agree. And, "just following orders" ( i.e. "just doing his job") isn't a legal defense to following unlawful orders. Nor should it be a moral defense to doing unethical things just because there's a paycheck involved.

Can you tell us OP's "orders" were, though? Because at this point you're just speculating and assuming the worst. Your comment about people working for unethical companies for a paycheck also comes off as classist and out of touch.

Edit: Hell, they said "ex" engineer. For all we know, they could have very well been there early on, taken issue with what they saw and then left because of that. Yet you and at least two others are assuming the worst and suggesting that they never be allowed to integrate with regular society.

Jesus.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#425

Post by lapcat »

cgriswald wrote: post #371
saxonww wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally people would just quietly stop using Twitter and services like it en masse, but that's not going to happen, so it's reasonable for people to complain about mistreatment. And that's what this is: the author got banned for their post violating a 'revenge porn' rule when that's not even close to what they posted. Twitter's content moderation didn't work here. It banned someone incorrectly. That person used the a…

This guy is upset that the free service he uses employs imperfect AI and it affected him personally. I agree we shouldn't be using AI for everything and we might even include humans after an AI makes a call just to verify the call. However, that has a cost and this guy isn't paying. I'd guess this guy wouldn't pay, because having to deal with occasional AI errors is part of the cost and he clearly doesn't want to pay…

I think what you're missing here is that the author is not looking for your sympathy, nor Twitter's sympathy. There's a larger point the author wishes to make about Twitter:

> Somehow they can do this, but racial slurs are generally pretty okay, white supremacy is largely ignored, and every Twitter troll I’ve reported for harassment gets a three-week investigation and then a “We find they did not violate our rules” email.

Note also that the author's goal is not getting unsuspended by Twitter, but rather this:

> I’ll not tweet for months if it gets someone to write “We as a company think the cat is revenge porn” in an email.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#426

Post by haswell »

themitigating wrote: post #98
OrangeMonkey wrote: post #12

This is how big tech does damage to humans. Love it or hate it, the online world is our current public square. A public square, in the united states, has typically been an area where people can shout out their concerns or whatever they want to anyone who can listen and the government cannot stop it. Currently, our public squares are owned by private megacorporations that not only ban people for reasons many people ag…

These global public squares didn't exist until social media so I don't consider it a human right.

The previous non-existence of certain technology isn't enough on its own to make this determination. It's also necessary to look at the overall state of a society to tease out the true consequences of these kinds of issues. I think a consequentialist lens is helpful here.

If your local municipality started preventing people who had said objectionable things from crossing into the town via a public road, it would not follow that this is just fine because at one time, roads didn't exist.

If you take a step back, and look at it as an issue of freedom of association and/or free speech, things get a lot murkier. If an entire society morphs itself to use those private entities for public discourse, at some point it almost doesn't matter that the entity is private, if the ultimate outcome is a serious violation of one's rights to associate/speak.

This is at odds with the expectations a private company rightly has about its ability to do business with whom they please, and this is why the issue is so contentious.

Neither side of this issue stands on solid ground.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#427

Post by mantas »

hinkley wrote: post #333
mantas wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like forums were fragmented. Topics, geographically etc. And politics was either sophisticated forums or just a byproduct of those fragmented topics. More users, many of them lurkers, would just result in more fragmentation and niches in that old world. The old forums was safe from feeling of censorship too. If you didn’t like mods too much, you could not easily go to another forum or start your own.

With fragmentation, several other things also happened. One, getting banned from one community was not the end of the world. You could join another. Two, because the forums were small, if you got banned from one, you couldn’t seek sympathy by complaining to the entire internet about the unfairness, because nobody knew about that community so getting them to care was a challenge. And three, you couldn’t complain to th…

Previously one needed technical abilities. Now one needs to cry enough to get someone or a whole group banned from the unified platform.

For a small forum being offline for a day or two is not an issue. Even if admins prove to have less patience than the attacker, the forum hivemind can easily migrate to another, new or old, forum. With some losses, but it's still just changing one small soapbox to another. Not a massive endevour like moving off FB/Twitter to self-hosted.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#428

Post by q-big »

cgriswald wrote: post #371
saxonww wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally people would just quietly stop using Twitter and services like it en masse, but that's not going to happen, so it's reasonable for people to complain about mistreatment. And that's what this is: the author got banned for their post violating a 'revenge porn' rule when that's not even close to what they posted. Twitter's content moderation didn't work here. It banned someone incorrectly. That person used the a…

This guy is upset that the free service he uses employs imperfect AI and it affected him personally. I agree we shouldn't be using AI for everything and we might even include humans after an AI makes a call just to verify the call. However, that has a cost and this guy isn't paying. I'd guess this guy wouldn't pay, because having to deal with occasional AI errors is part of the cost and he clearly doesn't want to pay…

> This guy is upset that the free service he uses

Twitter is not free. It's just that the payment is not money, but personal data, generating content that Twitter can use, and being a viewer of ads.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#429

Post by throw_m239339 »

powerhour wrote: post #276
throw_m239339 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When folks call trans people "degenerate", as many are wont to do on reddit (and as reddit is well known for), it's probably safe to assume they're not just trying to be playful. Can you link to such comment that was left unmoderated on reddit despite being reported?

I don't have hate speech bookmarked, sorry.

> I don't have hate speech bookmarked, sorry.

Surely you have instances of the hatespeech you claim that wasn't moderated upon report. Transgenders are probably the most protected group on reddit, so much that questioning their arguments even respectfully is banned from that website. Nobody asked you to bookmark anything, but you need to source your claims.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#430

Post by soraminazuki »

pvg wrote: post #416
soraminazuki wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I send you an automated message saying that you have done something illegal, you’d be fine with that? That’s not accusing you of a crime? That’s absurd.

'crime', 'illegal', etc, are rhetorical escalations you brought into this. Twitter suspends accounts that violate its policy against "intimate photos or videos of someone that were produced or distributed without their consent". The policy includes content that appears to be that but might not be, content posted inadvertently or with the intent to report, etc. There's no mention of crime and of course, there's no eas…

That’s a lot of words spinning a factual event into a “rhetorical escalation.” The fact is plain and simple, Twitter accused the author of posting revenge porn. Posting revenge porn is, despite your objections, considered a crime. Therefore, Twitter accused the author of a crime.
Post reply on HN