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

501–510 of 965 posts

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#501

Post by akomtu »

jacquesm wrote: post #398
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.

I think the goal is to anchor the discourse around "the gov is censoring speech" and let high-rank politicians talk about it openly, since now they are backed by undeniable facts. A few weeks ago anyone auggesting the gov is censoring twitter would be dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. Now anyone who says the opposite will be seen as a fool or a shill. The goal has been achieved, in other words.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#502

Post by benmmurphy »

emodendroket wrote: post #494
rayiner wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve never been a big fan of Taibbi. But all the things you’re mentioning are characteristic of his journalistic style, which made him famous in his coverage of Wall Street back in 2008. It’s uncharitable and filtered through a fundamental distrust of moneyed corporations, but I’ve never heard it described as “unhinged.” And I’m not sure “unhinged” is an appropriate description. For example, while “internal lingo” ma…

The argument seems to be that what the FBI is doing is more or less analogous to you clicking the report button, which hardly makes you a shadowy figure controlling Twitter if they act on your report.

It is very clearly an improper purpose. The FBI is trying to suppress 1A protected speech by reporting the tweets. The FBI is not allowed to suppress 1A protected speech. Imagine there was a button that would delete a Tweet and anyone could press it. Just because anyone could press the button would not make it legal for the FBI to press it.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#504

Post by [deleted] »

benmmurphy wrote: post #499
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…

The Tweets the FBI were asking to be removed were speech protected under the first amendment. It is very likely that this is unconstitutional but at a minimum this violates a strong norm in the US that the State does not interfere with people’s speech. When it comes to twitter a court had previously found that Trump could not even block people from his personal Twitter account (a final ruling was never made because t…

[deleted]

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#505

Post by mindslight »

Georgelemental wrote: post #400
b0sk wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

While I agree that's a great description of the general concept of conservativism, it has absolutely nothing to do with the people calling themselves conservatives these days. The best I can come up with is that it describes where they started off before they got so mad and wanting to tear everything down.

I had never voted for a major party candidate in a national election before, but in 2020 I found myself voting for Biden out of a genuine sense of conservatism.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#506

Post by eganist »

benmmurphy wrote: post #502
emodendroket wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument seems to be that what the FBI is doing is more or less analogous to you clicking the report button, which hardly makes you a shadowy figure controlling Twitter if they act on your report.

It is very clearly an improper purpose. The FBI is trying to suppress 1A protected speech by reporting the tweets. The FBI is not allowed to suppress 1A protected speech. Imagine there was a button that would delete a Tweet and anyone could press it. Just because anyone could press the button would not make it legal for the FBI to press it.

> It is very clearly an improper purpose. The FBI is trying to suppress 1A protected speech by reporting the tweets. The FBI is not allowed to suppress 1A protected speech. Imagine there was a button that would delete a Tweet and anyone could press it. Just because anyone could press the button would not make it legal for the FBI to press it.

I keep seeing this, and I'm confused every time I see it, because speech on a private platform isn't protected by the first amendment.

Twitter can always say no to the feds (and other governments) in re: far more onerous and demanding requests than just an agent clicking a Report button, and in fact with far more official processes you can see the stats where they actually do just that. https://transparency.twitter.com/en/reports/removal-requests...

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#507

Post by arwhatever »

thebytefairy wrote: post #493
scifibestfi wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are they contacting Twitter as the FBI in a backchannel to report potentially ToS offending tweets as opposed to the way we all report tweets to Twitter? Or indeed at all when they're not illegal tweets. Imagine Trump is in charge of the FBI.

Thsi is completely normal for any business. If you are ‘important’, like an authority or a large customer, you have priority channels to go through. When Tesla wants to contact the Department of Transportation, do you think they go to their website, fill in the public contact form and wait two months for a response?

The phone companies give federal agencies their very own server rooms!

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#508

Post by davidbarker »

threeseed wrote: post #434
jacquesm wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal seems to be to distract from Musk selling off Tesla at breakneck speed. Every time there is a big hoopla around Musk the first thing I do is check the stock price and sure enough it seems to be dropping like a stone in tandem with the news releases.

Also I think the idea is to try and attract conservatives from other apps e.g. TruthSocial. Good idea in theory except that many of those users aren't as well-behaved so to speak. And so the overall quality of the discourse has noticeably dropped since Musk took over.

I replied to a tweet that referenced Musk and Tesla, and simply mentioned that I sold my Tesla shares at the beginning of this week (and made a loss) because I didn't want any association with Musk any more.

The replies I got from Musk fans were shockingly (maybe not so shockingly) vile.

Turns out Musk sold his Tesla shares at the same time as I did — I wonder how those people replying to me would square that with their insults.

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#509

Post by benmmurphy »

scifibestfi wrote: post #433
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…

Why are they contacting Twitter as the FBI in a backchannel to report potentially ToS offending tweets as opposed to the way we all report tweets to Twitter? Or indeed at all when they're not illegal tweets. Imagine Trump is in charge of the FBI.

I think there is a strong argument that if you are working for the FBI you are not allowed to even click the report button as part of your duties for 1A protected speech.

You can imagine how this could be weaponised. For example FBI agents could be tasked to report tweets from people who hold disfavoured opinions. This interpretation is also inline with the court’s finding over Trump’s use of the block button: https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/05/trump-twitte...

Re: The Twitter Files, Part Six

#510

Post by philwelch »

viro wrote: post #487
philwelch wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why they’re flagging people making jokes about elections on Twitter, obviously.

Poe's Law. No one can tell your dumbass joke saying the election is on a Wednesday is a joke. Especially when it's right next to a bot account from eastern Europe that said the same thing.

I would expect the FBI to be able to tell whether or not that joke is criminal behavior within their legal jurisdiction.
Post reply on HN