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

“Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 412 posts

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#131

Post by dragontamer »

mbreese wrote: post #127
dragontamer wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know if the word "contamination" is appropriate here, but it's pretty clear that Elon doesn't see any kind of sharp boundaries between his various enterprises. Even without "contamination", TSLA stock price collapsed by over $100+ because Elon Musk predictably sold $Billions of stock to pay for the TWTR buyout. Its not like $33 Billion came out of nowhere. Elon had to sell TSLA to get that money. If TWTR ke…

Random thought -- is it a conflict of interest to sell so many shares, knowing that it will have a major impact on share price? If you know your personal actions (needing to sell a lot of TSLA shares to buy Twitter) will have an impact on your professional responsibilities (keeping the TSLA share price high), when does that become a conflict? Is there a way to mitigate that conflict?

That's the board's problem. Normally, you're not supposed to have the largest shareholder, CEO, and Board Chair be the same person.

SEC forced Elon off the board chair at least. But yeah, its a well known fact that Tesla's setup is full of conflicts of interest. It doesn't seem like the shareholders (or the board) feels like fixing it though.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#132

Post by pannSun »

nimbius wrote: post #38

Not to put too fine a point on it, but this is the sort of damage control id expect to see from someone only peripherally aware of or involved in their businesses accountability or strategic operations. This concern from advertisers has existed far too long for an executive action to have any meaning. the marketing conference call on november 3rd was your red flag where advertisers voiced their displeasure with firin…

Advertisers sure have a lot of influence in what gets published. Perhaps it's time to look critically at that. They're certainly the last group of people I'd trust with... anything. Their job is literally to manipulate people, yet somehow they became the arbiters of morality and permissibility.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#133

Post by krapp »

erichocean wrote: post #108
krapp wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He calls himself a free speech absolutist, and he's already banned parody, racist but legal (in the US) speech and criticism of himself and his technical knowledge - which is more restrictive than Twitter was prior. As is the plan to "deboost" negative and hateful tweets - I'll remind the court that when Youtube did the same thing, many people here considered even demonetizing and downranking content to be censorship…

Elon Musk discussed this on Apr 26, 2022: > By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people. Source: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376 If you want to argue Musk's position on…

quote for quote: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1499976967105433600

Even if you want to dismiss this, he still isn't following his own principles, since again, he's clearly banning legal speech.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#134

Post by aaomidi »

boole1854 wrote: post #105

Many commentators seem to think this is a sudden, recent backpedaling from a previous absolutist view on free speech. However, Musk has been promoting the "freedom of speech" vs "freedom of reach" distinction for a while, at least months before his takeover, including describing how such a policy should be implemented at Twitter. Here's one example quote from June, 2022: “I think there’s this big difference between f…

Sooooo shadow bans.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#135

Post by Avshalom »

pixl97 wrote: post #107
achenatx wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it isnt about truth or fiction, it is negative/hate tweets. I run a politics forum and the one rule is no insulting other people, groups, or positions. This makes for a very civil, but bland conversation. People engage with negative/hate tweets. I personally like talking politics without insults, but most people are incapable of it. It is easy to detect insults.

>It is easy to detect insults. I would fully expect the next thing for you to say is "I can program my own Twitter in a week" Trying to figure out language intent is just the kind of thing an engineer/moderator says is easy and then is in deep water a month later after a phrase that means "you're great" in one language means "you're a donkey's anus" in another. When you're moderating a small group it can be somewhat…

>>I would fully expect the next thing for you to say is "I can program my own Twitter in a week"

as a perfect example you just called achenatx a moron by implying that they would insult twitter employees by implying twitter is trivial.

it's an insult by way of a hypothetically ascribed insult and there's no chance in hell that either of them would trigger sentiment detection because they are so context dependent, even worse it's cultural context not textual context

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#136

Post by zamalek »

endominus wrote: post #124
zamalek wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Isn't censorship also speech?" That isn't my argument at all. My argument is that for you to stop me from shouting over your speech, you would be limiting my speech. I could argue that I am shouting so that everyone can hear me. I could be shouting important things. Limiting my speech is censorship. Free speech absolutism is a paradox. The only way to resolve that paradox is to limit speech that limits the fundame…

>I could argue that I am shouting so that everyone can hear me. I could be shouting important things. You could argue that, yes. What you can argue doesn't matter. I can also, equally, argue that I am free to DDoS someone I don't like, because there is no technical limitation to my doing so, and that anyone attempting to stop that is inhibiting my free speech or free use of whatever hardware I control. Where does any…

> And if this free speech absolutism is a position that no one holds, why are you arguing against it?

Musk is a free speech absolutist, by his own admission. His followers are likely similar.

> I have never heard even the most die-hard free speech supporter advocate that someone is free to follow you around all day, yelling to drown out your voice.

It's a contrived example, but despite that free speech absolutism allows for it.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#137

Post by mr90210 »

aaomidi wrote: post #134
boole1854 wrote: post #105

Many commentators seem to think this is a sudden, recent backpedaling from a previous absolutist view on free speech. However, Musk has been promoting the "freedom of speech" vs "freedom of reach" distinction for a while, at least months before his takeover, including describing how such a policy should be implemented at Twitter. Here's one example quote from June, 2022: “I think there’s this big difference between f…

Sooooo shadow bans.

You bet!

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#138

Post by Avshalom »

danans wrote: post #120
paxys wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People’s problem with Twitter was always that they would arbitrarily decide what is or isn’t acceptable speech, and Elon’s new solution does…exactly the same thing. The only thing that will change now is that liberal politicians and views will start being targeted rather than conservative/alt-right ones. Is anyone here really naïve enough to believe that this whole saga has been about “free speech”? It is simply a sh…

> The only thing that will change now is that liberal politicians and views will start being targeted rather than conservative/alt-right ones. Conservative speech like "lower taxes are better", "extract more petroleum", and "prayer should be allowed in public school" were never targeted. The "conservative" speech banned were things like "LGBT people should have their human rights denied" and "Let's get together and a…

also raises the question of who paxys thinks was funding tech companies before this.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#139

Post by hooverd »

boole1854 wrote: post #105

Many commentators seem to think this is a sudden, recent backpedaling from a previous absolutist view on free speech. However, Musk has been promoting the "freedom of speech" vs "freedom of reach" distinction for a while, at least months before his takeover, including describing how such a policy should be implemented at Twitter. Here's one example quote from June, 2022: “I think there’s this big difference between f…

Confusingly, that's what all the free speech absolutists spend their time yelling about. The right to not speak in the public square but have a megaphone.

Re: “Negative/hate tweets will be max deboosted and demonetized”

#140

Post by BryantD »

minimaxir wrote: post #7

Note that this is the dictionary definition of shadowbanning, which is the primary thing the free speech advocates on Twitter were hoping Elon would stop Twitter from doing.

Is there clear evidence that shadowbanning existed on Twitter? Misunderstanding eventual consistency doesn’t count. I’m not going to be surprised if there is real evidence, I’ve just never seen any.
Post reply on HN