Live data from Hacker News

Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

members.efn.org

11–20 of 83 posts

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#11
post #5

Im more concerned with social censorship and the mob mentality that seems to be determining justice. If you say something that is not politically correct or against the current narrative, you will get fired/bullied/harrassed/silenced/all three. Without honesty, there will be no progress. I shouldnt be afraid of posting my opinions and expressing my freedom of speech because i might lose my livelihood. But its the sad…

We had a guy fired basically because he was an islamophobe. He was annoying people with his "opinion" all the time. That did not work out pretty well with all the other colleges so he did not get jobs. Nobody wanted to work with him. His chargeability was messed up and then he was gone.

I'm pretty OK with that.

Generalizations never work.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#12
post #11
post #5

Im more concerned with social censorship and the mob mentality that seems to be determining justice. If you say something that is not politically correct or against the current narrative, you will get fired/bullied/harrassed/silenced/all three. Without honesty, there will be no progress. I shouldnt be afraid of posting my opinions and expressing my freedom of speech because i might lose my livelihood. But its the sad…

We had a guy fired basically because he was an islamophobe. He was annoying people with his "opinion" all the time. That did not work out pretty well with all the other colleges so he did not get jobs. Nobody wanted to work with him. His chargeability was messed up and then he was gone. I'm pretty OK with that. Generalizations never work.

Someone getting fired for annoying people with unprofessional opinions is vastly different than a guy making a dick joke to his friend loudly enough that someone else heard it, was offended by it, and told his employer she demanded his resignation.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#13
post #5

Im more concerned with social censorship and the mob mentality that seems to be determining justice. If you say something that is not politically correct or against the current narrative, you will get fired/bullied/harrassed/silenced/all three. Without honesty, there will be no progress. I shouldnt be afraid of posting my opinions and expressing my freedom of speech because i might lose my livelihood. But its the sad…

You are in essence saying there shouldn't be social consequences for speech.

I didn't get that at all from the post. I read that GP is sad that the 'social consequences' for speech have created an environment where people are afraid of voicing benign, unpopular opinions.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#14
post #4
post #2

One of my main concerns with mainstream social networks is this kind of subtle censorship/filtering. Some people think their Facebook stream is an accurate representation of their friends and surrounding reality, they are ignorant of the algoritms that decide what they will see and what not.

Recently a Chinese copy of twitter, Weibo, decided to implement similar functionality, but their ability in machine learning is very limited, so their lame work has only promoted paid members and threads. In the first week of its introduction, most users has noticed that there's roughly 50% less threads were read by other users. Actually I think theres's big future for this kind of censorship, if performed well, can…

Is this censorship or editorial/curation?

I've been infuriated by Facebook because I have a local events group on high priority in my feed, but FB has decided I only want to see about one post in five. So I miss a lot of news I want to see.

Meanwhile I still get porn posts on the various technology groups I read, even though I keep asking not to see similar content.

I'd have no objection to a good AI editor curating my feed. But FB has a very bad AI editor making bad choices for reasons that ignore my interests, and I really don't want that at all.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are in essence saying there shouldn't be social consequences for speech.

The internet has created a weird environment where repercussions for socially unacceptable speech (even if taken completely out of context) can be dramatically more severe than any harm that was caused by the original speaker. In general, a distasteful tweet or Facebook post shouldn't cost someone their job, make them a target for anonymous threats or make them fear interacting with society at large any more than it…

What it should and should not do is a matter of opinion. The fact is, putting something in writing is permanent. Writing casually/carelessly can haunt you, like it always has. The confusion comes when regarding things like Twitter as 'speech' and calling the authors 'speakers'.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are in essence saying there shouldn't be social consequences for speech.

The internet has created a weird environment where repercussions for socially unacceptable speech (even if taken completely out of context) can be dramatically more severe than any harm that was caused by the original speaker. In general, a distasteful tweet or Facebook post shouldn't cost someone their job, make them a target for anonymous threats or make them fear interacting with society at large any more than it…

Generally it shouldn't, sometimes though it certainly should.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#17
post #5

Im more concerned with social censorship and the mob mentality that seems to be determining justice. If you say something that is not politically correct or against the current narrative, you will get fired/bullied/harrassed/silenced/all three. Without honesty, there will be no progress. I shouldnt be afraid of posting my opinions and expressing my freedom of speech because i might lose my livelihood. But its the sad…

You are in essence saying there shouldn't be social consequences for speech.

You are in essence saying that ad hominem is a valid debating technique.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#18
post #5

Im more concerned with social censorship and the mob mentality that seems to be determining justice. If you say something that is not politically correct or against the current narrative, you will get fired/bullied/harrassed/silenced/all three. Without honesty, there will be no progress. I shouldnt be afraid of posting my opinions and expressing my freedom of speech because i might lose my livelihood. But its the sad…

You are in essence saying there shouldn't be social consequences for speech.

Is there a difference between social consequences for speech and harassment? I'm reminded of the old freedom fighter vs. terrorist debate.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#19
post #11
post #5

Im more concerned with social censorship and the mob mentality that seems to be determining justice. If you say something that is not politically correct or against the current narrative, you will get fired/bullied/harrassed/silenced/all three. Without honesty, there will be no progress. I shouldnt be afraid of posting my opinions and expressing my freedom of speech because i might lose my livelihood. But its the sad…

We had a guy fired basically because he was an islamophobe. He was annoying people with his "opinion" all the time. That did not work out pretty well with all the other colleges so he did not get jobs. Nobody wanted to work with him. His chargeability was messed up and then he was gone. I'm pretty OK with that. Generalizations never work.

It sounds like that he would be fired even if he was annoying people in a different, politically-correct way.

That doesn't sound as that much of a problem.

Re: Adventures in Twitter Censorship [pdf]

#20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are in essence saying there shouldn't be social consequences for speech.

The internet has created a weird environment where repercussions for socially unacceptable speech (even if taken completely out of context) can be dramatically more severe than any harm that was caused by the original speaker. In general, a distasteful tweet or Facebook post shouldn't cost someone their job, make them a target for anonymous threats or make them fear interacting with society at large any more than it…

There has always been repercussions for socially unacceptable speech. What the internet has affected is who can hear or read your speech.

If I go into a supermarket and shout, "I hate black people and they shouldn't even be in America!" I am going to suffer the consequences, but probably only from the people who heard me. Everyone else will have heard it second-hand and may due to social circle pressure decide to sever ties with me. The only way I'll actually suffer long-term (other than being beat up by a mob) is if I was famous since people like it when famous people do things.

The problem is, people continue to think that "The Internet" is just some kind of throwaway void where they can spout whatever they want. Justine Sacco probably isn't a racist, and was probably making a joke about "white privilege" or "white bubble". But she showed poor judgement in assuming that writing that in a public space would be benign. Even with her lack of followers. Text is not a good way to facilitate a joke that requires context. Her joke about AIDS and Africa and white people not being affected is based on some context no one but herself had.

If _I_ am at the supermarket and I hear some old cranky dude yell that out. It's a story I'll probably tell my friends about. They in turn may decide to use that as an inside joke/catchphrase of our circle of friends. But there is no way I'll repeat that to someone else outside of the group of friends that know what the context is. I definitely won't post it on Twitter, not without at least having posted the story about the crazy old man in the supermarket.

So I kinda laugh when people say they can't say anything that's not "PC" anymore. That to me just means they want to really spout some really offensive opinions to a public audience without paying the consequences of doing so. Then of course when there is kickback, they blame it on people being too "PC"

Post reply on HN