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

All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–97 of 97 posts

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#91

Post by mcphage »

akira2501 wrote: post #61
protomyth wrote: post #31

I've learned the mob, no matter their political beliefs, doesn't know a damn thing as a group. If there is a technical answer, it used to be possible to get a correct answer, but that is almost always through the view of some political leaning. Frankly, given the utter sh?t-show of YouTube content warnings[0], I have no faith in this crud. This just seems like a bots paradise to influence opinion and ban people. 0) t…

I have never in my entire life expected the truth from the crowd. Why on earth would you do that if truth was truly your concern? These proposals seem to ignore this basic reality. They also presume that peoples primary desire in communication with one another is truth. Our entire system of language belies that idea entirely. The condescension of it all gets to me as well, as if you give everyone the unvarnished trut…

> They also presume that peoples primary desire in communication with one another is truth.

Maybe. Or maybe it means that these sites don’t like people abusing their networks to spread garbage.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#92

Post by xboxnolifes »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #84
protomyth wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The mob doesn't elect our government. Individuals go into a booth and pull the lever. In a fair election, their is no interaction between people when the vote is cast. Sure, there are campaigns and such, but the voting moment is one person at a time inside their head. Mobs become a thing unto themselves and group into a dangerous thing. Their are numerous studies about how people act differently as part of a mob.

Ok yes this is the true meaning of mob referring to in-person groups. But 'mob' in this discussion was being used with respect to groups of people in a more general sense like people on the internet whom all act individually from their own houses.

replying to a group conversation (reddit thread, hackernews comments, twitter chain, etc) is closer to a mob than an individual activity.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#94

Post by anon291 »

krapp wrote: post #87
anon291 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Simple question: by explicitly deciding to censor the hunter biden story, did twitter and facebook prevent americans from learning data that may have changed their vote? The Mueller investigation and its results were widely reported on and disseminated by all media, so it's not equivalent at all. Americans can and did make up their mind regarding that issue.

Simple answer: probably not. Everything Trumpists were claiming - that the laptop contained evidence of the stolen election, that it contained Biden's child porn stash, evidence he created COVID with Fauci, whatever - was obvious misinformation and character assassination, an attempt to repeat the effect of the DNC leaks with Hillary Clinton in 2016, where just the implications of nefarious dealings and "smoking guns…

You're being disingenuous here, and blinded by your own partisanship. Both this story and the Mueller investigation (and whatever other inquiries into Trump) deserve scrutiny in the public eye. It is not absurd to think that Twitter and Facebook, two massive media companies with well-known connections to the democratic party, are major sources of information and huge multiplying factors in the spread of information about a lot of news.

> The laptop failed to gain traction under its own terms, not because it was suppressed by the government.

Simply not true, given that the man is under active FBI investigation.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#95

Post by ynbl_ »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #88
ynbl_ wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

meh you get the point

I get the point that you made a provably false claim. The Clinton administration was behind the Clipper chip, while many on the right (including uber-right figure John Ashcroft) were opposed to it.

nah i actually stated a random hazy example off the top of my head, assuming the right did it, as its the kind of shit the right tried to pull in the 90s.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#96

Post by akira2501 »

mcphage wrote: post #91
akira2501 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never in my entire life expected the truth from the crowd. Why on earth would you do that if truth was truly your concern? These proposals seem to ignore this basic reality. They also presume that peoples primary desire in communication with one another is truth. Our entire system of language belies that idea entirely. The condescension of it all gets to me as well, as if you give everyone the unvarnished trut…

> They also presume that peoples primary desire in communication with one another is truth. Maybe. Or maybe it means that these sites don’t like people abusing their networks to spread garbage.

> Or maybe it means that these sites don’t like people abusing their networks to spread garbage.

Is that based upon the desire of the users, or the desire of the owners? Why do we talk about the concerns of the owners as if they were the concerns of the users?

It's an odd sleight of hand.

Re: All Twitter users in the US will start to see crowdsourced fact checks on tweets

#97

Post by mcphage »

akira2501 wrote: post #96
mcphage wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They also presume that peoples primary desire in communication with one another is truth. Maybe. Or maybe it means that these sites don’t like people abusing their networks to spread garbage.

> Or maybe it means that these sites don’t like people abusing their networks to spread garbage. Is that based upon the desire of the users, or the desire of the owners? Why do we talk about the concerns of the owners as if they were the concerns of the users? It's an odd sleight of hand.

I’m speaking specifically of the owners, given they’re the ones instituting these systems.
Post reply on HN