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

Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 855 posts

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#441

Post by a_victorp »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #42
esharte wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you miss the whole part where these "policial opponents" attempted a coup against the democratically elected president?

There was no coup. There was a protest. The protesters wanted the military to enact a coup. And the military did not attempt a coup. You simply cannot claim that elderly people with bibles and flags amounts to a coup or even an attempt at one. This was discussed at length only two days ago. If you disagree with this, just refer to this comment thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41387024 My account is rate l…

Asking for a coup IS an attempted coup

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#442

Post by bgarbiak »

wordofx wrote: post #410
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weirdly Hybrids have now become a climate denial fave. In any thread about EVs there is a typical HN commenter desperate to tell you that they drive a hybrid, not an EV like those silly virtue signalers. For those who remember the vicious attacks on the Prius it's a wild shift in attitude.

Weird how pointing out climate change inaccuracies destroyed scientific debate. In any thread about climate change they are desperate to tell you that you’re a climate denier when you point out inaccurate information. For those who remember the vicious attacks on science, we called that the dark ages.

"Pointing out inaccurate information" in HN comments is not scientific debate, nor a science.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#443

Post by kelnos »

pavlov wrote: post #425
wordofx wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Weird how pointing out climate change inaccuracies destroyed scientific debate. In any thread about climate change they are desperate to tell you that you’re a climate denier when you point out inaccurate information. For those who remember the vicious attacks on science, we called that the dark ages.

In the late 1990s there were still medical scientists who questioned the causal link between HIV and AIDS. This was at a time when effective drugs were already approved and saving lives. Those scientists believed they were asking reasonable questions and pointing out potential inaccuracies. But imagine you were an HIV positive patient in 1995 and you latched on to this scientific debate to conclude that probably you…

> With climate change, it’s going to take a century and today’s denialists won’t be around to feel the effects.

The thing that is so maddening is that we're already feeling the effects of climate change, but the denialists just claim those effects either aren't really happening, or are caused by something else (without bothering to define "something else").

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#444

Post by h4ck_th3_pl4n3t »

Well, the general issue that caused it is disinformation campaigns

People that point out Brazil's current state of affairs don't seem to realize that eventually, a ban of unmoderated social networks is inevitable from a legislative standpoint.

I wish that X/bluesky/Facebook/etc had something like a clear label next to its users, maybe a robot icon when the post was created via their API or in an automated manner.

That would help people to identify campaigns already a lot.

But on the other hand, these are the paying customers, right? It's always "just advertisement" until it is not anymore.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#445

Post by dageshi »

jdietrich wrote: post #364
pfannkuchen wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people see Musk differently from how he actually is. Or at least how he sees himself. He has always said, for many years, that he got into SpaceX to work towards the goal of making humans a multiplanetary species, and he got into electric cars to work towards the goal of having a sustainable energy society. I think he legitimately believes that “the woke mind virus” is an existential threat to our society, an…

I remember when the Toyota Prius was a potent symbol of everything that was wrong with smug liberals. Lazy comedians still use the Prius as a punchline. Why doesn't a Tesla Model 3 carry the same sort of political baggage? Why don't right-wing conspiracy theorists consider Musk to be part of the "WHO/WEF globalist elite", despite the fact that he's a tech billionaire who is literally trying to plug people's brains in…

If you want an honest answer to Prius vs Tesla, it's because Prius was seen as a slower and lamer version of existing cars for people who didn't care about cars. While Tesla's could get from 0-60 faster than hypercars of the time.

Tesla's offered an experience in terms of pure acceleration off the line that actually made them cool, even people who might never buy one wouldn't mind experiencing one off the line.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#446

Post by nunobrito »

hypnotist wrote: post #334

I am surprised no one mentioned nostr. https://nostr.com/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostr supposedly more distributed and censorship resistant than bsky. https://thenewstack.io/bluesky-vs-nostr-which-should-develop...

[flagged]

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#447

Post by tliltocatl »

energy123 wrote: post #434
eterps wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on your thoughts a bit? Do you envision that a very large amount of posts get reviewed in a community notes style?

The algorithm would analyze the post's/user's likes. If a post/user is liked by people who often disagree, then boost the engagement of that post/user. If a post/user is liked by an echo chamber, then deboost it.

What you describe is a flamewar maintenance algorithm. I mean, it COULD work if all people were sound and reasonable, but that's obviously not the case. And being a flamewar battleground is probably not the goal of most platform owners either. Also, for many topics that are not politics you don't need disagreement for a productive discussion.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#448

Post by moefh »

mikrotikker wrote: post #431
input_sh wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who else is there to blame for Twitter refusing to designate a representative, leading to a ban? I'm sure pre-Musk Twitter wouldn't have lost the entire market in the 7th most populous country.

Better to stand strong in the principles of the 1st amendment than bend the knee to a foreign government. Free speech is the milk of the gods, the US constitution is something to be coveted...

It's hard to believe that's what's happening, since Musk has previously agreed to censor posts for a foreign government[1], writing at the time:

    The choice is have Twitter throttled in its entirety
    or limit access to some tweets. Which one do you want?”
One difference in that case is that Musk had close business ties to that government, so read in that whatever you want.

[1] https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/05/twitter-musk-censors...

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#449

Post by nunobrito »

extheat wrote: post #378
slashdave wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so sure. I mean, as long as Bluesky doesn't just simply ignore a judge. Also, there has been some backlash.

Bluesky isn’t a centralized service, the developers cannot themselves comply with judicial orders (any of them).

It is centralized. Just block the app and domain, down it goes.

Very different when compared to NOSTR, where are a variety of domains and apps keep popping up everywhere around the globe.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#450

Post by kelnos »

n_plus_1_acc wrote: post #435
hexage1814 wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>but he threatened a fine of 200k and imprisonment to the person Musk appointed as representative if his stricture orders were not complied with Moraes essentially wanted a hostage. Executives of companies shouldn't be arrested for things they have no power over, such as content moderation. My guess is that Moraes wanted to force Musk's company to not have a legal representative in the country, because the moment you…

Executives have, by definition, cobtrol over everything inside their company.

That's not even a little bit true. Even the CEO is at the mercy of their board, and their shareholders. Other CxO positions are subservient to the CEO. Often VPs are considered executives, and they certainly don't have control over everything inside their company.

If Twitter/X were to hire a rep in Brazil, regardless of the title they're given, that rep would have little to no power over the moderation choices of the parent company.

Post reply on HN