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

The Twitter Files, Part Six

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 965 posts

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#291

Post by [deleted] »

roenxi wrote: post #237
diob wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait till folks realize how much contact government agencies have with nearly every company (leaking stories, spin, etc.). It's weird that it's turned into some sort of naive left vs right issue. I'd be asking what the goal is, but apparently it's that. Point fingers, suggest no solutions beyond vote for us.

It would be foolish to see this as a left v. right issue. This is an authoritarian vs. libertarian battle. This sort of activity is what the government 100% shouldn't be involved in. Having a department of What is Allowed To Be Said is one of those ideas that gets tried regularly and has a terrible track record that - inevitably - ranges between a source of mild shame in hindsight to a nightmare influence on society.…

[deleted]

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#292

Post by jacquesm »

briandear wrote: post #273
jacquesm wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I guarantee that someone like Zuckerberg does not have access to my data.

And the moment it became inevitable that Musk took over Twitter I deleted my account. And that was one of many reasons.

The only two social media sites that I partake in are HN and up to Elons acquisition Twitter and that is because I had/have a fairly high degree of faith in their ability to at least try to do the right thing. With Musk, Zuckerberg and several others I have the conviction that given the opportunity that they will do the wrong thing.

Would you bet that Musk has not already abused his position to gain information from private communications on Twitter?

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#293

Post by mc32 »

paulpauper wrote: post #7

3. Twitter’s contact with the FBI was constant and pervasive, as if it were a subsidiary. 4. Between January 2020 and November 2022, there were over 150 emails between the FBI and former Twitter Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth. How is this constant? This is just 1 request every 7 days . I figured it would be more. Also, it's called the FBI. Their job is to investigate federal matters, which includes content on socia…

What would a bureau investigating crimes have any involvement in sifting through accounts looking for ToS violations?

Are they the TOS violation cops ala BSA?

What other companies were they helping in hunting down ToS violators?

This is not their scope of work and it has the appearance of impropriety by suggesting accounts that should be reviewed for suspension.

Imagine if you had the Trump admin suggesting whose accounts to review?

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#294

Post by jacquesm »

dmix wrote: post #283
briandear wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

He means someone who doesn't share your political perspective. Not someone with actual threat of force. We haven't seen Twitter arbitrarily leak DMs yet. Even Matt Taibbi said they only have access to screenshots of admin interfaces directly related to their specific stories around uncritical FBI/DHS access, shadowbanning for questionable political purposes, and the whole Trump thing. It's far from the ideological fr…

Until they get hacked. The chances of which are going up by the day.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#296

Post by djur »

jasonhansel wrote: post #260
oceanplexian wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any time the FBI “asks” a company to do something it’s immediately a form of coercion. Government law enforcement agencies shouldn’t be “asking” for anything unless it’s done under due process of law. Sorry but I 100% disagree.

> Any time the FBI “asks” a company to do something it’s immediately a form of coercion. That's just obviously false. It was pretty clearly just a suggestion that Twitter investigate violations of its rules, not a demand.

Taibbi even presents clear evidence that Twitter did not take the FBI's reports as automatic cause for taking action.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#297

Post by colordrops »

jasonhansel wrote: post #255
colordrops wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Twitter isn't a media outlet; content moderation isn't censorship; routine communications over email aren't "behind closed doors"; suggestions that Twitter investigate certain accounts carry no legal weight.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#298

Post by lapcat »

jacquesm wrote: post #254
lapcat wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 250K+ registered users That's the relevant number. So Twitter is about 1000x larger than HN. From a surveillance standpoint, we're really only talking about commenters, on both sites.

True, but Twitter is mostly cat pictures, I think the average HN users could do a lot more damage to society than the average Twitter user.

> I think the average HN users could do a lot more damage to society than the average Twitter user.

How so? How many HN comments have "gone viral"? How many news stories are about a HN comment? How many politicians and journalists and pro athletes and Hollywood celebrities are commenting on HN?

Any given HN comment can receive only a theoretical maximum of 250K upvotes, if (improbably) every registered user upvoted it, and those upvotes would be superfluous anyway, because they would only bring the comment to the top of a single HN submission.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#299

Post by abigail95 »

nickthegreek wrote: post #274
briandear wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

They can't/don't want to monetize the pornography on their website because some of it is abuse material.

Normal people think it's not enough to not profit from it - you need to try very hard to remove it.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#300

Post by mc32 »

jacquesm wrote: post #103
astrange wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's very low for how often law enforcement might contact a social media service. Sometimes it's because people report "illegal" posts to them instead of you. Sometimes it's just because they're old people and aren't going to go through your report form when they could email you. What controls when you have to respond to them is the law, not them. You'll know when that is, because it'll come with legal process.

It's so low that I'm pretty sure they missed the bulk of the communications between LE and Twitter. But hey, more installments, more eyeballs, more outrage and so more money for Musk.

Are local LE contacting Twitter about possible ToS violations or rather reaching out for cooperation on suspected crimes?

One is none of their business the other is expected.

Post reply on HN