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

391–400 of 965 posts

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#391

Post by lp0_on_fire »

nickthegreek wrote: post #328
starkd wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everything is a partisan. The FBI should not be asking Twitter to take down accounts. Period. These accounts he cited were low-follower accounts that were doing nothing illegal or immoral. This is a threat to everyone, no matter what side of the fence you are on. How is that so difficult to understand?

Some of them were posting the wrong election date. I personally think that crosses into immoral territory.

I personally think having the US government, or any government for that matter, crosses into immoral territory.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#392

Post by RetpolineDrama »

etchalon wrote: post #374
ekianjo wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, it's called the FBI. Their job is to investigate federal matters, which includes content on social social media their job is not to interfere with the 1st amemndment.

Their organization seems weirdly large if that's their sole job.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#393

Post by colordrops »

Apocryphon wrote: post #389
colordrops wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Distraction for whom? Is HN ground zero for prosecuting the FBI? The audience here is capable of holding many things in their heads at once.

The FBI is putting pressure on Apple to drop Enhanced Encryption, and still refusing to declassify their JFK files. Those are far more urgent issues than getting mad at mods. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33906649 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33883834

We are just trying to achieve concensus on facts here, not strategize on our plan to prosecute the FBI. This is a pseudo anonymous forum, not a law firm or activist group. We can talk about all of these things at once, despite your protestations.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#394

Post by remarkEon »

mc32 wrote: post #377
jacquesm wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much. As for vaccine sceptics: there were a lot of people amplifying utter bullshit messages around that theme and arguably shutting those accounts down saved a bunch of lives. You may well disagree with that but in a fluid situation I can see why they did what they did. It does not deserve the beauty prize but since we're still learning how to deal with this social media thing where everybody has a megaphone…

>As for vaccine sceptics: there were a lot of people amplifying utter bullshit messages..." What is the actual crime that precipitates their appetite to nonchalantly ask for review? Moreover, the CDC and govt officials, including Biden himself, spread bullshit messages about Covid and its vaccines. Did they ask Twitter to suspend Antifa accounts because of the violent nature of some of their demos? Or people amplifyi…

I think we don’t know. All we’re being shown is what Taibbi is tweeting.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#395

Post by angelbreakfree »

The wildest part of the Twitter files is the unhinged framing that they are presented under.

1. Anyone who has been in a tech company knows that there is internal lingo that refers to features we devs make. But it's presented as being an "Orwellian language"

2. Based on the emails he posts, the agencies give links to review based on tips they receive or their own intel and twitter then decides if it violates ToS or not (and they sometimes did not act or simply temporarily suspended). But it's presented as a "deep state"-like collusion where the agencies control if twitter act on them or not.

3. The people in the company discuss internal matters and are sometimes critical of potential decisions. But they are presented mostly stripped of context and the focus is on anonymized employees snarky comments to make it seem like decisions were arbitrary, partisan, and without any regard to logic or context.

I could go for hours listing these.

Most quote tweets are people thinking this confirms a suspected malicious intent from twitter and that they intentionally dramatically shifted the outcomes while colluding with one side.

If anything, this confirms that Twitter acted (outside of a couple isolated occurences) in a way tamer way than I ever imagined them acting while handling the issues at hand.

EDIT: Formatting

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#396

Post by Apocryphon »

colordrops wrote: post #386
Apocryphon wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not alarming because it's so pervasive it's the way things are. Thus when something new is brought up their impact needs to be weighed accordingly to prioritize.

Growing up in a fascist regime may make it seem normal but at some point you need to raise your hackles and feel alarmed regardless of the past, because it's a fascist regime .

Yes, and that's how I feel about the shutdown of the Z-Library, and their refusal to declassify their JFK files.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#397

Post by Lendal »

camjohnson26 wrote: post #3

This is the height of hypocrisy. Everything the "twitter files" have disclosed so far is in line with what most people expected was happening, but Musk's censorship of the platform has been far more egregious than anything that came before. This isn't to defend the actions that Twitter took, which were arguably partisan in some cases, but it's difficult to make the case that Twitter wasn't making a best effort to cur…

If someone did want to assassinate lil X as he flew on a plane, they would simply buy a radio and listen in to his pilot, who is constantly "doxxing" Musk in real time, every minute of every day, as he talks to air traffic control. Why would you rely on some kid posting to social media very inaccurate and second-hand information, when you could just listen in to his coordinates broadcasting live on the radio, or at least install an app such as Flightly?

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#398

Post by jacquesm »

angelbreakfree wrote: post #395

The wildest part of the Twitter files is the unhinged framing that they are presented under. 1. Anyone who has been in a tech company knows that there is internal lingo that refers to features we devs make. But it's presented as being an "Orwellian language" 2. Based on the emails he posts, the agencies give links to review based on tips they receive or their own intel and twitter then decides if it violates ToS or n…

They need to spice it up somehow, the evidence by itself won't do the trick.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#399

Post by RetpolineDrama »

jacquesm wrote: post #315
mc32 wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 acc…

That's not how it works. How it works is that they come across something that is either illegal or that could snowball into a problem and it happens to violate the TOS. This gives them enough grounds to ask for a removal. If it isn't against the TOS but they feel that they need to have it removed anyway they'll go by a judge and get an order, or, if contact is good they might first ask you politely.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#400

Post by Georgelemental »

b0sk wrote: post #142
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

That's not what conservatism is. If you want the actual best quote about conservatism, it's this one:

> There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.”

- G. K. Chesterton

(Also, "conservative" and "right-wing" are not the same thing)

Post reply on HN