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

Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 975 posts

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#571

Post by rglover »

etchalon wrote: post #253
rglover wrote: post #224

A fun idea that I'm certain no one has considered with any level of seriousness: don't moderate anything. Build the features to allow readers to self-moderate and make it "expensive" to create or run bots (e.g., make it so API access is limited without an excessive fee, limit screen scrapers, etc). The "pay to play" idea will eliminate an insane amount of the junk, too. Any free network is inherently going to have pr…

1. There are plenty of places online that "don't moderate anything". In fact, nearly all of the social networks started off that way. The end result is … well, 4Chan. 2. "Self-moderation" doesn't work, because it's work. User's don't want to have constantly police their feeds and block people, topics, sites, etc. It's also work that never ends. Bad actors jump from one identity to the next. There are no "static" iden…

> The end result is … well, 4Chan.

And? Your opinion of whether that's bad is subjective, yet the people there are happy with the result (presumably, as they keep using/visiting it).

> Self-moderation" doesn't work, because it's work.

So in other words: "I'm too lazy to curate a non-threatening experience for myself which is my responsibility because the offense being taken is my own." Whether or not you're willing to filter things out that upset you is a personal problem, not a platform problem.

> Advertisers aren't going to just "accept" that their money is supporting content they don't want to be associated with.

It's not. Twitter isn't creating the content nor are they financing the content (e.g. like a Netflix type model). It's user-generated which is completely random and subject to chaos. If they can't handle that, they shouldn't advertise there (hence why a pay-to-play option is best as it prevents a revenue collapse for Twitter). E.g., if I I'm selling crucifixes, I'm not going to advertise on slutmania.com

---

Ultimately, people need to quit acting like everything they come into contact with needs to be respectful of every possible issue or disagreement they have with it. It's irrational, entitled, and childish.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#572

Post by quadcore »

I think tiktok is doing incredibly well in this regards and in almost every social network aspect. Call me crazy but I now prefer the discussions there as HN's most of the time. I find high-quality comments (and there is still good jokes in the middle). The other day I felt upon a video about physics which had the most incredibly deep and knowlegeable comments Ive ever seen (edit: found the video, it is not as good as I remembered but still close to HN level imo). It's jaw dropping how well it works.

There is classical content moderation (the platform follows local laws) but mostly it kind of understand you so well that it put you right in the middle of like minded people. At least it feels that way.

I dont have insider hinsights on how it trully works I can only guess but the algorithm feels like a league or two above everything I have seen so far. It feels like it understand people so well that it prompted deep thought experiments on my end. Like let say I want to know someone I could simple ask "show me your tiktok". It's just a thought experiments but it feels like tiktok could tell how good of a person you are or more precisely what is your level of personal development. Namely, it could tell if youre racist, it could tell if youre a bully, a manipulator or easily manipulated, it could tell if youre smart (in the sense of high IQ), if you have fine taste, if you are a leader or a loner... And on and on.

Anyway, this is the ultimate moderation: follow the law and direct the user to like minded people.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#573

Post by TMWNN »

bombcar wrote: post #420
billyjobob wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slashdot started introducing features like this 20 years ago. We thought ”web of trust” would be the future of content moderation, but subsequent forums have moved further and further away from empowering users to choose what they want to see and towards simple top down censorship.

Web of trust works too well and unfortunate ideas can be entertained by someone you trust, which is a no-no once you have top-down ideas. Almost everyone has someone they trust so much that even the most insane conspiracy theory would be entertained at least for awhile if that trusted person brought it up.

>Almost everyone has someone they trust so much that even the most insane conspiracy theory would be entertained at least for awhile if that trusted person brought it up.

What's wrong with that?

If someone you trust brings up a crazy idea, it should be considered. Maybe for a day, maybe for an hour, maybe for a half second, but it shouldn't be dismissed immediately no matter what.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#574

Post by Tenal »

paradite wrote: post #371
thepasswordis wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How old are you? An adult running a discord server for mentally ill teenagers seems like a cautionary tale from the 1990s about chatrooms.

I'm afraid I'm too young to understand that reference or context around chatrooms. Anyway, the Discord server is purely for business and professional purposes. And I use the same username everywhere including Discord, so it's pretty easy to verify my identity.

No post body was provided.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#575

Post by matai_kolila »

Yeah well, Yishan failed miserably at topic moderation on Reddit, and generally speaking Reddit has notoriously awful moderation policies that end up allowing users to run their own little fiefdoms just because they name-squatted earliest on a given topic. Additionally, Reddit (also notoriously) allowed some horrendously toxic behavior to continue on its site (jailbait, fatpeoplehate, the_donald, conservative currently) for literal years before taking action, so even when it comes to basic admin activity I doubt he's the guy we should all be listening to.

I think the fact that this is absurdly long and wanders at least twice into environmental stuff (which is super interesting btw, definitely read those tangents) kind of illustrates just how not-the-best Yishan is as a source of wisdom on this topic.

Very steeped in typical SV "this problem is super hard so you're not allowed to judge failure or try anything simple" talk. Also it's basically an ad for Block Party by the end (if you make it that far), so... yeah.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#576

Post by michaelt »

prox wrote: post #356
vkou wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN works very well, because it's about as far from free speech as you can get on the internet, short of dang personally approving every post.

What kind of free speech is not allowed? What can’t you say right now that you feel should?

Where are the people arguing about Donald Trump? Where are the people promoting dodgy cryptocurrencies? Where are the people arguing about fighting duck-sized horses? Where's the Ask HN asking for TV show recommendations?

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#577

Post by hackerlight »

Fervicus wrote: post #552
crummy wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how come you stopped reading there?

My second statement answers that question. I don't want moderation advice from someone who was involved in a platform that purposely sets moderation policies to create political polarization. A comment by someone below sums it up nicely. > ...and it's triply not true on yishan's reddit which both through administrative measures and moderation culture targets any and all communities that do not share the favoured new-…

> favoured new-left politics.

Citation needed. r/ChapoTrapHouse was banned, and there's many large alt-right subreddits in existence right now that haven't been banned (like r/tucker_carlson).

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#579

Post by bambax »

mypalmike wrote: post #565
bambax wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're confusing bad actors with bad behavior . Bad behavior is something good people do from time to time because they get really worked up about a specific topic or two. Bad actors are people who act bad all the time. There may be some of those but they're not the majority by far (and yes, sometimes normal people turn into bad actors because they get upset about a given thing that they can't talk about anything els…

I can "behave well" and still be a bad actor in that I'm constantly spreading dangerous disinformation. That disinformation looks like signal by any metadata analysis.

Yes, that's probably the limit of the pure behavioral analysis, esp. if one is sincere. If they're insincere it will probably look like spam; but if somebody truly believes crazy theories and is casually pushing them (vs promoting them aggressively and exclusively), that's probably harder to spot.

Re: Ex-Reddit CEO on Twitter moderation

#580

Post by pixl97 »

carapace wrote: post #440
pixl97 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, if you're on the internet long enough you'll remember the days before you were portscanned constantly. You'll remember the days before legions of bots hammered at your HTTP server. You'd remember it was rare to have some kiddie DDOS your server off the internet and you had to hide behind a 3rd party provider like cloudflare. That internet is long dead, hence discussions like Dead Internet Theory.

My mom still has a land-line. She gets multiple calls a day, robots trying to steal an old lady's money. For this we invented the telephone? the transistor?

Honestly the internet has a lot to do with this problem too, stealing VOIP accounts and spoofing caller ID has enabled a lot of this.
Post reply on HN