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

The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 580 posts

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#231

Post by tptacek »

mandmandam wrote: post #218
quadrifoliate wrote: post #125

I have been responsible a bit of content moderation myself, and interacted with mods on various forums. It's possible that this is responsible for some of my views, summarized here. - The "secret" aspect of all this can be largely ignored. Twitter is under no obligation to tell its users exactly how their Tweets are moderated. I am sure most moderation tools are secret, including whatever Twitter (or for that matter,…

> Overall, I don't really see too much that would cause me to gasp with horror. I didn't "gasp", but, silently blocking an esteemed scientist is indeed horrible. He, and who knows how many others, presented sensible analyses against extended lockdowns in schools. This dissenting view, like with the lableak theory, was systematically blocked from ever reaching journalists eyes, and thus from reaching parents minds. Th…

No post body was provided.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#232

Post by [deleted] »

mandmandam wrote: post #218
quadrifoliate wrote: post #125

I have been responsible a bit of content moderation myself, and interacted with mods on various forums. It's possible that this is responsible for some of my views, summarized here. - The "secret" aspect of all this can be largely ignored. Twitter is under no obligation to tell its users exactly how their Tweets are moderated. I am sure most moderation tools are secret, including whatever Twitter (or for that matter,…

> Overall, I don't really see too much that would cause me to gasp with horror. I didn't "gasp", but, silently blocking an esteemed scientist is indeed horrible. He, and who knows how many others, presented sensible analyses against extended lockdowns in schools. This dissenting view, like with the lableak theory, was systematically blocked from ever reaching journalists eyes, and thus from reaching parents minds. Th…

[deleted]

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#233

Post by MisterMower »

afavour wrote: post #119
foolinaround wrote: post #38

Discrimination 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....

To me the evidence seems to point to the opposite, like the screenshot of LibsOfTikTok: that account was being shielded from moderation action by a warning note saying not to act without speaking to a superior first. Sounds like the account was at benefit, not detriment.

You think that was to protect them? I figured it was because they didn’t want any heavy handed actions to be “misinterpreted” as them putting their finger on the scale. Those actions required more political finesse.

They specifically said in their communications that LibsOfTikTok hadn’t violated any rules directly. Why the suspensions then?

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#234

Post by rhaksw »

nkozyra wrote: post #142
username3 wrote: post #123

> Twitter is working on a software update that will show your true account status, so you know clearly if you’ve been shadowbanned, the reason why and how to appeal https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1601042125130371072

Depriving features of their core purpose seems to be the Musk M.O. to date, starting with paid checkmarks that then forced creation of Official tags. Making shadowbans not shadowbans means there's no real reason to have them at all. So just get rid of them?

This way reveals to people whether or not they were impacted.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#235

Post by encryptluks2 »

paul7986 wrote: post #192
TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not the fact that these systems exist, it’s that Twitter denied that they did for years, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Indeed and here is their tweet saying they do not https://twitter.com/twitter/status/1022658436704731136?s=46&... Isn't there a fiduciary duty to be honest with their investors?

Musk went through with the deal because he couldn't prove Twitter lied to investors, so I see no reason to trust him now.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#236

Post by rhaksw »

etchalon wrote: post #151
username3 wrote: post #123

> Twitter is working on a software update that will show your true account status, so you know clearly if you’ve been shadowbanned, the reason why and how to appeal https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1601042125130371072

Musk will now speed run the reasons shadow banning became a popular practice.

One of those reasons is that people didn't know it was happening. Without that, bots will have a harder time taking over the system. Shadow banning only benefits bots because they're far more likely to check for the visibility of their content than genuine individuals.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#237

Post by rideontime »

quadrifoliate wrote: post #125

I have been responsible a bit of content moderation myself, and interacted with mods on various forums. It's possible that this is responsible for some of my views, summarized here. - The "secret" aspect of all this can be largely ignored. Twitter is under no obligation to tell its users exactly how their Tweets are moderated. I am sure most moderation tools are secret, including whatever Twitter (or for that matter,…

> I don't think Weiss understands what "shadow ban" means.

She very well may understand, but is assuming (correctly) that her audience does not.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#238

Post by bavell »

quadrifoliate wrote: post #196
bavell wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think Weiss understands what "shadow ban" means. It means that you post Tweets, but no one ever sees them. None of the practices she describes amount to what is usually described as a shadow ban or a hellban. Preventing a post from showing up in trends or searches is not a shadow ban. Google SafeSearch does not "shadow ban" explicit images or links. Colloquially, I think many information suppression tactics…

> Colloquially, I think many information suppression tactics get lumped under the term "shadow-ban" and that your definition is very narrow. It reinforces your position so I understand why you're defining it as such but it's not very convincing to anyone who doesn't share your position. Of course, that's assuming you're genuinely interested in persuasion instead of yelling into the echo chamber. Reasonable criticism.…

I very much appreciate your good-faith response even though I'm not entirely convinced (yet?). Getting late for me so I have to bow out for now. I hope we as a community continue to discuss these issues, as it seems to be central to a lot of the problems we face today and will be facing tomorrow.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#239

Post by quadrifoliate »

somenameforme wrote: post #221
quadrifoliate wrote: post #125

I have been responsible a bit of content moderation myself, and interacted with mods on various forums. It's possible that this is responsible for some of my views, summarized here. - The "secret" aspect of all this can be largely ignored. Twitter is under no obligation to tell its users exactly how their Tweets are moderated. I am sure most moderation tools are secret, including whatever Twitter (or for that matter,…

Yes, the secrecy does matter. I think can immediately think of two big reasons: 1) We should censor for how things are said, instead of what is said. When censorship is carried out secretly it will inevitably trend towards abuse. One of the examples given in these leaks is that @DrJBhattacharya [1] was secretly put on a trends blacklist because of what he was saying. He's a well spoken doctor and Stanford epidemiolog…

You are using phrases like "blacklisting doctors" and "censorship" while discussing (essentially) a message board that is used to sell advertisements. I don't think that's a reasonable position.

Twitter is a private company that wants to sell advertisements by enabling people to have happy conversations. Fundamentally, they are going to optimize for that, and not whatever high-minded ideals of censorship that we hold dear to our hearts. If a scientist is yelling about mysterious conspiracies and causing arguments on the site, they will use whatever least harmful tool is available to them to shut up said scientist.

It's certainly possible that Musk-owned Twitter will similarly pivot to selling advertisements for MAGA hats and guns or whatever; and censor all talking points that run counter to their views. This would also be a reasonable course of action for them, and many of us have prepared our migrations away from the site in case this happens.

Re: The Twitter Files Part 2: Twitter's Secret Blacklists

#240

Post by wesleywt »

The problem with these "Twitter Files" is that it is being released in the form of "bombshells" when in reality they are exposing nothing. But by doing it in the form of a bombshell the right wing is making it look like they have been oppressed all these years, when it is their voices that are mostly promoted on these platforms.
Post reply on HN