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

161–170 of 412 posts

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

#161

Post by oska »

attentive wrote: post #156
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #22

I'm certainly not a fan of how Musk has handled the Twitter takeover, but this sentiment, "New Twitter policy is freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach", seems highly reasonable to me, no? That is, what I find so awful about most social media (and places like YouTube) is how they focus on some of the most anger-inducing content for "engagement". That is, I think the problem is much more their algorithms than wha…

Freedom to "yell into the void" isn't really a freedom of speech. They might as well post-it on the bathroom walls.

Your 'yelling into the void' here is every yell being recorded and kept, every person who has a link to a recording being able to hear it, every person who follows a chronological playback of your yells being able to hear them all, etc, i.e. there is no 'void'.

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

#164

Post by pschuegr »

mabbo wrote: post #16

It's all about economics of demand for what Twitter is offering: advertising. Elon's changes have massively harmed the value of an ad on Twitter. Moderation teams are massively cut, meaning advertisers have to worry about their products beside hate speech or worse. At the same time, Elon is explicitly un-banning people who were banned for hate speech, promising that no ads will show beside their future hate speech- i…

It seems a little unfair that people who hang out in hateful places get a better UX (ie no ads). If anything, they should generate ads for anti-hate groups and therapy providers and plaster the feed with them.

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

#165

Post by blitzar »

lliamander wrote: post #157
hooverd wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I disagree. What the free speech side is arguing is that by trying to restrict "reach" you are trying to prevent interested consumers of that speech from ever hearing it. The prime example is when someone's tweets don't show up in the timelines of subscribers. People who specifically what to hear that speech never get a chance to.

Deplatforming is simply a form of limiting reach, a twitter ban isnt an internet ban

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

#166

Post by shapefrog »

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.

I thought shadow bans were bad ... its all very confusing.

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

#167

Post by luckylion »

blitzar wrote: post #165
lliamander wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. What the free speech side is arguing is that by trying to restrict "reach" you are trying to prevent interested consumers of that speech from ever hearing it. The prime example is when someone's tweets don't show up in the timelines of subscribers. People who specifically what to hear that speech never get a chance to.

Deplatforming is simply a form of limiting reach, a twitter ban isnt an internet ban

And disallowing someone to live on earth isn't a death sentence. They can always migrate to Mars.

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

#168

Post by oska »

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.

I'm a Free Speech advocate. What I hoped Elon would do is stop the permanent banning of people from the platform and the removal of tweets. He appears to be at least somewhat delivering on that hope. Having a tweet 'deboosted' rather than completely removed and the tweeter also permanently removed is a substantial improvement.

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

#169

Post by littlestymaar »

notadev wrote: post #92
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…

Please stop spreading the falsehood that Eli Lilly lost billions because of a fake verified tweet. https://medium.com/@westwise/did-twitter-just-take-8-billion...

A discussion about viral tweets and stock price collapse that doesn't address the topic of high frequency trading bots? And written by a PhD in bioinformatics, who gives zero evidence of his claims. Why should we pay attention to his argument?

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

#170

Post by danans »

jimbokun wrote: post #149
danans wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Does anyone outside of Twitter actually know what the criteria was for banning Tweets and Tweeters?

Look at the history of banned accounts [1] You don't need polynomial regression to figure out that nobody was being banned for traditional, non-hate and non-violence-inducing conservative or liberal speech. It's mostly harassment, threats, impersonation and disinformation.

Nobody has been banned for advocating: lower taxes, higher taxes, cuts to government spending, increased government spending, abortion rights, anti-abortion rights, etc.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions

Post reply on HN