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

Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 64 posts

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#31

Post by airstrike »

nomilk wrote: post #11

Seems Brazil's court (the TSE) banned platforms from recommending (via 'feeds' and similar) ~700 accounts related to its election, to avoid 'amplification' (unless the user already follows the account, in which case it's permitted). I'm not sure if this is a good or bad idea. But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). Love or hate X,…

They didn't ban recommendations because they thought it was a "good idea".

They banned it to have reality comply with Brazilian electoral law which is written so that every candidate has the same amount of airtime.

It is not the job of the judiciary to determine whether a law should or shouldn't exist, but to make sure all laws are correctly enforced. Remembering this fact isn't optional.

Said differently, arguments about such decisions should revolve around whether the law says what the courts say it does or whether it was applied correctly—not whether the law should exist.

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#32

Post by marcosdumay »

diego_moita wrote: post #10

It is interesting that attitudes, laws and initiatives that would be called "censorship" against traditional media are more and more accepted against social media platforms, all over the world in very democratic countries. I am not against these attitudes. I just want to point to that. A possible reason is that these platforms are seen as either monopolies or American imperialism agents. In both cases these are very…

This is not censorship, and traditional media have always been forbidden from picking a candidate and promoting them in Brazil.

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#33

Post by etchalon »

nomilk wrote: post #11

Seems Brazil's court (the TSE) banned platforms from recommending (via 'feeds' and similar) ~700 accounts related to its election, to avoid 'amplification' (unless the user already follows the account, in which case it's permitted). I'm not sure if this is a good or bad idea. But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). Love or hate X,…

Transparency for something that was well known, reported on and legally documented?

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#34

Post by Georgelemental »

nomilk wrote: post #11

Seems Brazil's court (the TSE) banned platforms from recommending (via 'feeds' and similar) ~700 accounts related to its election, to avoid 'amplification' (unless the user already follows the account, in which case it's permitted). I'm not sure if this is a good or bad idea. But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). Love or hate X,…

These are specifically the accounts of every registered candidate in the election (regardless of party affiliation).

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#36

Post by carlosjobim »

Fnoord wrote: post #26
nomilk wrote: post #11

Seems Brazil's court (the TSE) banned platforms from recommending (via 'feeds' and similar) ~700 accounts related to its election, to avoid 'amplification' (unless the user already follows the account, in which case it's permitted). I'm not sure if this is a good or bad idea. But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). Love or hate X,…

> But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). I would certainly not, as it is most likely propagandists; these aren't interesting. But either way, the purpose of this is to protect democracy, and by mentioning the very accounts, this could have a Streisand effect. That by itself is influencing the election, and Musk knows this. That i…

Your reasoning sounds like levels upon levels of paranoia. Read out loud to yourself what you are saying. You're saying that it's 1. Good to limit certain people from being heard and 2. Bad to let the public know which people have been censored.

I couldn't think of a seasoned KGB commander with more totalitarian reasoning than what you are voicing. Not even the censors you are defending have anything against the public knowing which accounts are limited and why.

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#37

Post by mschuster91 »

carlosjobim wrote: post #36
Fnoord wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). I would certainly not, as it is most likely propagandists; these aren't interesting. But either way, the purpose of this is to protect democracy, and by mentioning the very accounts, this could have a Streisand effect. That by itself is influencing the election, and Musk knows this. That i…

Your reasoning sounds like levels upon levels of paranoia. Read out loud to yourself what you are saying. You're saying that it's 1. Good to limit certain people from being heard and 2. Bad to let the public know which people have been censored. I couldn't think of a seasoned KGB commander with more totalitarian reasoning than what you are voicing. Not even the censors you are defending have anything against the publ…

Well Musk has interfered in elections and riots before so it’s definitely a good idea to hold him under extremely close scrutiny. Being the world’s richest person and one of the most powerful influencers comes with responsibility, a responsibility that Musk has shown to be lacking.

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#38

Post by bspammer »

Fnoord wrote: post #26
nomilk wrote: post #11

Seems Brazil's court (the TSE) banned platforms from recommending (via 'feeds' and similar) ~700 accounts related to its election, to avoid 'amplification' (unless the user already follows the account, in which case it's permitted). I'm not sure if this is a good or bad idea. But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). Love or hate X,…

> But if I were Brazillian, I'd be immediately following all ~700 accounts (and probably unfollowing all 700 after the election). I would certainly not, as it is most likely propagandists; these aren't interesting. But either way, the purpose of this is to protect democracy, and by mentioning the very accounts, this could have a Streisand effect. That by itself is influencing the election, and Musk knows this. That i…

They’re not propagandists, they’re the official accounts of candidates in the election. I don’t see any problem with this as long as it’s applied to all candidates equally.

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#39

Post by tt24 »

well_ackshually wrote: post #24
diego_moita wrote: post #10

It is interesting that attitudes, laws and initiatives that would be called "censorship" against traditional media are more and more accepted against social media platforms, all over the world in very democratic countries. I am not against these attitudes. I just want to point to that. A possible reason is that these platforms are seen as either monopolies or American imperialism agents. In both cases these are very…

Anyone sensible doesn't call this censorship. It might sound complicated if you live in a country where elections are won by who spends most money for airtime, but granting candidates equal airtime on traditional media is how it works if you want to hold normal elections. Since that can't work on algorithmic platforms where everyone sees different content, you just block their reach to avoid anyone gaming it. Normal…

> It might sound complicated if you live in a country where elections are won by who spends most money for airtime

Which country are you referring to here? I’m not familiar with any that work like this. In the United States, Trump famously spent less than his competition and won both times. Bloomberg outspent his competitors by multiple orders of magnitude and endured a humiliating loss.

Re: Brazilian election filter in X For You timeline

#40

Post by carlosjobim »

mschuster91 wrote: post #37
carlosjobim wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reasoning sounds like levels upon levels of paranoia. Read out loud to yourself what you are saying. You're saying that it's 1. Good to limit certain people from being heard and 2. Bad to let the public know which people have been censored. I couldn't think of a seasoned KGB commander with more totalitarian reasoning than what you are voicing. Not even the censors you are defending have anything against the publ…

Well Musk has interfered in elections and riots before so it’s definitely a good idea to hold him under extremely close scrutiny. Being the world’s richest person and one of the most powerful influencers comes with responsibility, a responsibility that Musk has shown to be lacking.

Sure, but what does this have to do with what I wrote? The other poster is arguing that people shouldn't be allowed to know who has been censored. That's deep into 1984 or Soviet / Chinese censorship territory.
Post reply on HN