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

“Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 1001 posts

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#631

Post by GaylordTuring »

klyrs wrote: post #201
mwint wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh come on, that’s like saying someone isn’t being tortured, just temporarily having their pleasure removed until they confess.

Is it actually anything like torture, though?

That's often not the point of analogies like this. So for the analog to be valid, the seriousness of the situation described doesn't have to be on similar levels. If you look up the definition of "analogy" on merriam-webster.com it says: "resemblance in some [my emphasis] particulars between things otherwise unlike"

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#632

Post by Beltalowda »

mytailorisrich wrote: post #617
Beltalowda wrote: post #574

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would stay well within the law if I would reply to your post with "oh fuck off you retarded cunt!!!" This would obviously fall well within the protections of free speech for many countries, certainly those of the U.S. And if you really wanted to you can go much nastier than that. But I don't think it should be allowed here, or even on Twitter. Even using as an example here already feels iffy, but I feel adding it m…

But you are not making any points here, just basically a stunt. If Twitter is the de facto standard and akin to an utility why should they make decisions on what's allowed beyond lawfulness?

> But you are not making any points here, just basically a stunt.

My point is that allowing "anything that's within the law" will lead to some pretty unpleasant stuff.

> If Twitter is the de facto standard and akin to an utility why should they make decisions on what's allowed beyond lawfulness?

I don't think Twitter is the "de-facto standard" or akin to an utility, and the problem is that by allowing such content you would drive away a lot of people who would rather not be buried with insults and nastiness every time they post something.

There are loads of places where speech is regulated in some way, and you can't just go off on a expletive-laden rant at any moment. If I go to a Biden or Trump Q&A townhall meeting and start shouting abuse at him I will be removed as well.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#633

Post by tqi »

concinds wrote: post #430
Waterluvian wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm. Would you consider that to be similar to the Reddit model of cloistering themes so that unlike-minded people aren’t artificially pushed together?

The problem is that reddit clusters based on topic, rather than social group. If I'm a bad state actor who wants to influence America on a mass-scale, I buy a bunch of accounts, and buy upvotes, and can shift the hivemind. Or I just infiltrate the mod team. Obviously you'd need to be relatively sophisticated to not get caught. But Twitter is based on social circles, not topics; those concerns don't apply. Instead of…

TBH I don't think clustering on social groups is the panacea that you hope. Misinformation spreads insanely fast on WhatsApp, even after limiting Group thread size and # of forwards.

We'll never get back to the way things were before the internet became ubiquitous. Back then, we had a limited number of sources, and normal people had very limited reach. But now, it's too easy for individuals to pass information along, and with more sources of it the juiciest / most outrageous information will always go the furthest.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#634

Post by Zagill »

catiopatio wrote: post #547
Zagill wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are we this far into the modern trans rights movement and people still haven't wrapped their brains around sex and gender being two distinct concepts?

I “still” haven’t wrapped my head around it because not once have I been presented with non-tautological replacement definitions for “man” and “woman”. I will immediately change my mind and recant my views — here and now! — if someone provides: - A specific definition of what “gender” is, if not a synonym for “sex” - Non-tautological definitions of “man” and “woman” that are consistent with your definition of “gender…

Gender is all about social interactions. For example, blue and pink being "masculine" and "feminine." Is there any relation to male or female chromosomes that would make blue appropriate for someone with X and Y chromosomes, and pink appropriate for someone with 2 X chromosomes? Of course not. Same goes for wearing makeup or high heels. At a different time in history, those things would have been considered "manly" but over time that's changed. None of the social flags that we use to determine a person's gender have anything to do with their genitalia or chromosomes, because we generally don't have that information when we see people in public. If gender and sex were really the same, it might be a bit more difficult for pre-op trans people to pass for a gender other than the one they were assigned at birth.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#636

Post by 0x00000000 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #373
concinds wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter ignored multiple reports of personal threats directed at me specifically (involving concentration camps and general death threats, etc.) "This tweet doesn't violate Twitter rules." People I didn't know, who I had zero negative interactions with before. That was way before Musk. You just can't have human moderation at that scale. They have to brainstorm how to prevent these tweets in the first place, rather th…

That’s awful. And I’ve also witnessed the same kind of abuse that goes ignored. Has any large social media site ever solved this? 4chan does by having no rules: if you show up, expect the absolute worst of humanity. Reddit does by having countless volunteer moderators who basically do 98% of the moderation. Facebook suffers from the same problems as Twitter.

4chan does have rules. Low quality posts, spam, racism and nsfw are against the rules on most boards.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#637

Post by ridesbikes »

blargey wrote: post #595
beachy wrote: post #522

I wish that Twitter - or some other social network - would experiment with the type of moderation seen on HN. Some would maybe call it heavy handed but I think of HN as a place that is mercifully relatively free of trolling, outrage culture, political bullshit and other toxic behaviors. In my experience there's no place like HN on the internet, and that's due I suspect to having a highly professional moderator (@dang…

I honestly don’t understand the consistent (self) praise for HN comments. Perhaps the mods make valiant efforts to enforce some vague standard of decorum and it would be worse without that thankless work, but any topic that doesn’t lend itself to software industry anecdote sharing is filled with the same vacuous, uninformed polemic as any other generalist social media site, just with a thin veneer of politeness. And…

No post body was provided.

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#639

Post by [deleted] »

slg wrote: post #516
partiallypro wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, because those aren't even remotely similar things. It wouldn't be a "hate crime" to call a Catholic a Protestant, or a Gay person a Straight person or a Black person a white person. It would be a hateful to deny them rights or to call for abuse. In this instance the "hate crime" is merely saying someone's biological sex is x, even if they say they are y. However, If I called a non-trans woman a man or a non-trans…

What do you think is the fundamental joke the article is making? The only joke I see is "a trans person exists". The article isn't about her policies, her performance in her job, or even complexities in our evolving definition of either sex or gender like you are implying. The joke is that this person is trans. The message of that joke is the existence of a trans person in public is worthy of mockery. Therefore the o…

[deleted]

Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

#640

Post by dale_glass »

solveit wrote: post #475
slg wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Giving an award to a Black person has slightly different connotations when it is done at a NAACP meeting compared to a Klan meeting.

But I absolutely don't want Twitter to decide which organisations are like the NAACP and which are like the Klan. This is regardless of who runs Twitter.

I very much want to. I've been on the net long enough to have noticed that ultimately what makes a discussion platform worth using is the right sort of moderation. Without moderation any large enough community quickly degenerates. The best platforms tend to be stringently moderated to keep up the quality -- not only kick out the wrong people, but discourage the low effort and pointless content enough that most of what's going on is worth reading.

For instance I absolutely wouldn't be using NH if it wasn't moderated in a way I happen to like. There are the various chan-derived boards and such, but I don't see any value in even finding out which still exist, because it's just not worth it my time to wade through mountains of garbage.

Post reply on HN