Learned basically nothing here. So the FBI helped Twitter with content moderation? Who gives a crap.
When people become a sworn officer of the FBI or any other federal LEO officer, they take an oath to protect and defend the US Constitution. When instead of upholding the Constitution, they ask a private company to violate people's first ammendment rights, that is an abuse of power. It may be within Twitters terms of service to ban people and censor people, and that may be fine for Twitter, but for a sworn officer to…
People don't have a constitutional right to post on Twitter.
I'll try to find an article explaining the concept, but for right-wing authoritarians, the hypocrisy is the point. In group vs out group. https://level.medium.com/its-always-about-power-f9fca4321e0c
This is probably the best quote about conservatism: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. See: https://kottke.org/22/12/the-boring-conservatism-of-elon-mus...
There's an odd new risk for startups: someone buys your company and then releases all the internal documents with hostile intent. The Twitter stuff that's come out now has been pretty uninteresting, surprising and often basically telling a story of people doing the best job they could in difficult circumstances. But if you are at a small company consider what all could be acquired and used to defame your employees an…
The thing to really worry about is that someone like Musk has direct access to all of your DMs, including those of politicians the world over.
Someone like Zuckerberg has access to your data as well. And what about the government having access to DMs? That’s far scarier. Has Snowden not taught us anything? We are only just now worried about this? Complaining about Musk without complaining about Zuckerberg or the government is just hypocrisy.
There's an odd new risk for startups: someone buys your company and then releases all the internal documents with hostile intent. The Twitter stuff that's come out now has been pretty uninteresting, surprising and often basically telling a story of people doing the best job they could in difficult circumstances. But if you are at a small company consider what all could be acquired and used to defame your employees an…
Quoted post unavailable.
Why do people keep saying they knowingly allowed child exploitation. Do I need to be deep in the qanon to get this reference or something?
The thread clearly shows that they were going after misinformation, and trying to make sure they only did so when accurate. At most you could say that the FBI sent some low quality reports, which seems like a better question for your congressional representatives since they have oversight. It does not show or allege a crime was ignored - can you be precise in what you’re insinuating?
They didn't have to submit high quality reports because they were working with ideological soulmates.
What ideology do you believe the Federal Bureau of Investigation to share with Twitter's former leadership?
It's literally none of those things. The FBI contacted trust and safety and said 'Hey we have concerns about these tweets'. Twitter decided to take them down in some cases. Who is corrupted here? Twitter for taking reports and then deciding how to react to them? The FBI for finding misinformation that might lead to crazies creating mass casualty events? The FBI at no time FORCED twitter to do anything. So it's not vi…
The corruption is that the requests were ideologically based. In other words, they only requested conservative tweets to be removed.
Aside from people in tech and the MAGA crowd, does anyone actually care about the "Twitter Files" stuff?
You may not mind it because you're side won. But that is incredibly short-sided. What if the FBI decides to sway an election to a candidate you don't support sometime in the future? See where this is going?
I'll try to find an article explaining the concept, but for right-wing authoritarians, the hypocrisy is the point. In group vs out group. https://level.medium.com/its-always-about-power-f9fca4321e0c
> the hypocrisy is the point. I am right wing, and I hear right-wing commentators say things like "for left-wing authoritarians, the hypocrisy is the point" all the time. Seriously, the article you linked sounds exactly like something I would read from "my" side, just with good guys and bad guys reversed.
I'd consider myself a centrist democrat (registered Democrat, vote mostly for Democrats, had a wonderful childhood in a very multicultural region of California, spent several years living in Berkeley CA, my sister who I'm close to works for her local Democrat party) and I've been surprised by the strong element of left-wing extremism on HN. The culture of the site has changed quite a bit in the past few years. It used to be that there was room for more perspectives here. I feel that my interest in building a coherent political worldview puts me in a minority compared to HN users who just want to sling mud at people they see as their opponents.