No post body was provided.
The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
61–70 of 580 posts
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#62There must be a ton of ex (or current) Twitter employees on HN: can one of you verify if the user management tool shown in the photos is an actual thing and provide more information on how it works?
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#63Discrimination as alleged by conservatives but pooh-poohed as others as merely delusional is now clearly proved. How can tech self-regulate itself, or should there be external agencies who would watch the growing power of tech companies? and who would watch them? Decentralization never seems to take off, so we seem to be left with these existing players like twitter, meta, google ...who are de-facto monopolies....
No post body was provided.
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#64Sorry about off topic but am I banned on top pages of HN? Or is this topic filtered? Recently I don't see this thread on the first 10 pages. Now it's appeared on page 7. It should be more visible with the number of upvote and comment, shouldn't it?
Topic is being downvoted/flagged, I assume. Normally HN loves tech company drama. And there are screenshots of twitter accounts from the employee/moderator tooling. It's super interesting stuff, even just technically.
It's appeared on #27 and then be flagged. Just wow HN.
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#65Quoted post unavailable.
> Why does big tech, including HN all have the same auth-left wing bias?
I think intelligent people are abnormally capable of self-deception.
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#66Wow this post is #208 on HN: https://i.imgur.com/e4lQko4.png It's only an hour old. The post must've been flagged, which I know has a pretty heavy influence on the ranking here. For those flagging, this conversation is worth having. Whether platforms secretly demote people's content is important to them.
> For those flagging, this conversation is worth having. Whether platforms secretly demote people's content is important to them.
It is an important topic but the Twitter thread linked is not a particularly useful resource. For one, none of this is new information:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgxd3d/twitter-insider-acces...
That it’s being brought out now with such fanfare smells like corporate propaganda.
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that gross? It's their speech to decide what they want to promote or not promote. Why are you anti-free speech?
It's not trustworthy when a system actions a user's content without telling them. Free speech principles are also a thing. The question is not what is getting demoted, it's how . In this case, it's being done secretly, and Twitter isn't the only one doing it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33916414
This outrage is hilarious coz HN shadowbans people too. Which increases site quality which is why all the complainers are on here.
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#68There must be a ton of ex (or current) Twitter employees on HN: can one of you verify if the user management tool shown in the photos is an actual thing and provide more information on how it works? As another sibling comment states, other platforms also do similar things. It's easy how such systems get started and evolve. In fact, given the severe downvoting I see on this and similarly polarizing threads on HN, I th…
It is, and none of this is new information, given this article from 2020:
https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgxd3d/twitter-insider-acces...
A more pressing question, IMO: one of the screenshots shows a “direct messages” button. Does Weiss and/or Taibbi have unrestricted access to read users DMs right now?
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#69Quoted post unavailable.
[deleted]
Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists
#70Wow this post is #208 on HN: https://i.imgur.com/e4lQko4.png It's only an hour old. The post must've been flagged, which I know has a pretty heavy influence on the ranking here. For those flagging, this conversation is worth having. Whether platforms secretly demote people's content is important to them.
> For those flagging, this conversation is worth having. Whether platforms secretly demote people's content is important to them. It is an important topic but the Twitter thread linked is not a particularly useful resource. For one, none of this is new information: https://www.vice.com/en/article/jgxd3d/twitter-insider-acces... That it’s being brought out now with such fanfare smells like corporate propaganda.
> none of this is new information
It is news to many when social media takes action against content without telling the author: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33916519