Live data from Hacker News

How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

thefp.com

151–160 of 986 posts

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#151
post #7

Great article to read if you want to know how the "sausage was made" at Twitter. I think most people knew it was an absolute dumpster fire, but it's even worse than that. As expected, the folks doing the policing of "disinformation" were entirely unqualified for the role (I love the banning of the Harvard School of Medicine epidemiologist who said "vaccines are for people at risk" - apparently the folks at Twitter kn…

[deleted]

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#152

Conspiracy theory is just the news in 6 months. Hell at this rate I’d hear somebody out if they said the moon is made of cheese. What a time to be alive.

> Hell at this rate I’d hear somebody out if they said the moon is made of cheese. Right. That's the problem.

It only starts to become a problem if you cant explain why its wrong. Having parts of your worldview that you told yourself are not up for verification is exactly how being wrong looks like from the perspective of somebody who is. And once you no longer have a means of verifying reality, you have no way to comprehend what you actually ignore and what the consequences are. You just blinded yourself because you felt smart enough to not need it.

By deciding what people (not just you) should or shouldnt think about you identified the problem, that people could be too dumb for that consideration and make mistakes, while blatantly ignoring that the same might not just apply to your decision as well, but that you are removing the fundamental solution to said problem. Verification.

Thats the problem. Not comprehending that the problem is more difficult that it seems and that the "easy" solution you propose has fundamental flaws that will result in catastrophic failure. Or worse, comprehending it but being overwhelmed and deciding to at least feel right regardless.

And unfortunately, i dont see a third option outside of said incompetence or said malice. I truly hope i am wrong because unfortunately there seem to be a lot of people embracing this stuff. But it also wouldnt be too surprising because talking about this gets awfully close to violating the board rules. Which would explain why this catastrophic idea can so easily spread.

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#153
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN readers lean toward the establishment narratives.

I wonder for how long that will still be the case. The fringe is getting more and more grip on HN and we may well be fighting a losing battle.

[flagged]

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#154
post #151
post #7

Great article to read if you want to know how the "sausage was made" at Twitter. I think most people knew it was an absolute dumpster fire, but it's even worse than that. As expected, the folks doing the policing of "disinformation" were entirely unqualified for the role (I love the banning of the Harvard School of Medicine epidemiologist who said "vaccines are for people at risk" - apparently the folks at Twitter kn…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#155
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder for how long that will still be the case. The fringe is getting more and more grip on HN and we may well be fighting a losing battle.

There should be more mistrust of the institutions that lie without cessation.

This is true, but I think some are trying to have one space that isn't overwhelmed with these divisive conversations. It still leaks in, but the discourse usually doesn't degenerate into nastiness as much as I see on other sites.

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#156
post #16

A tangent: this domain seems to have an abnormal number of flagged articles. It made me wonder if there's something like shadowbans for domains here and if so, what are the criteria?

Some domains are banned. Others are downweighted- that includes most media sites, including this one.

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#157
post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder for how long that will still be the case. The fringe is getting more and more grip on HN and we may well be fighting a losing battle.

There should be more mistrust of the institutions that lie without cessation.

The answer to this seems to be deciding YouTube videos are authoritative. Or other completely random sources which don't offer any credible evidence that their narrative is any better than the mainstream sources.

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#158

Imagine if this was Trump. That for me puts the reaction in tech circles in perspective. We would see two impeachments, wall to wall news coverage, protests by employees at Facebook, Apple and Google, all asking for deplatforming everyone associated and so much more. Its ridiculous that we're unable as a society to separate actions from political affiliation.

[deleted]

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they haven't stopped agitating. And probably won't stop. Which makes me wonder: with the degree of weaponization of the internet on the side of the anti-vaxxers will the next pandemic be 'the big one'? Enough people that refuse vaccination and you are looking at an entirely different probable outcome. Here in NL a small army of foaming-at-the-mouth conspiracy theorists did their utmost to undermine the vaccinatio…

[flagged]

I fear you are right.

The interesting thing to me is not what happened during COVID-19, but during the previous pandemic, the one that wasn't and that was nipped in the bud due to some very fortuitous circumstances and the speedy action of authorities and health care officials in many countries collaborating with unprecedented efficiency:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SARS

COVID-19 had some parameters slightly different, for instance the incubation time was a bit longer allowing it to spread undetected.

There is no reason to make any assumptions about the various parameters of the next pandemic but they could very well be worse than COVID-19 and the way we've dealt with this one makes me quite skeptical about our ability to come through this sort of thing unscathed, especially not if every Tom, Dick & Harry are going to run interference.

We got lucky, twice.

Re: How Twitter moderated the Covid debate

#160

I don't really care about a private company making reasonable decisions and learning about their internal debate process. Up until Musk, I was impressed to see Twitter grow a backbone and not fall to the cowardly cries of "free speech." What I don't follow is the jump some people make from reasonable moderation like this, to fascism. They see internet platform moderation as a gateway drug to a physically oppressive g…

> cowardly cries of "free speech."

What a world we live in where this is a reasonable statement to many.

Post reply on HN