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

Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

patriotone.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 391 posts

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#101

Post by ineedasername »

nahqz wrote: post #79
ineedasername wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible you're reading too much into that comment. The GP may simply have been providing a PSA about where they have found useful information given that one potential source has been removed. From HN community guidelines on reading into a comment: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

I think the "reputable" word is what gave the commenter away.

Why? They're saying they have people they believe are reputable. Again, reading into that to assume the commenter intended to say the banned account was sending out bad information violates the community guidelines of "plausible interpretation." Is it plausible that the commenter merely meant "Hey, here's some reputable sources"? Seems possible to me.

If one store goes out of business and I say "Here are two store that I consider reputable for buying the same things", that really doesn't mean I think the original store was not reputable.

The comment does not at all read to me as justification for the ban one way or another. It is a simple statement that there are sources the commenter trusts on the topic, with a referral to them.

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#102

Post by throwaway2331 »

mbesto wrote: post #83
MrPatan wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> user "the account was “artificially” amplifying information". Where does it say the information was false in that sentence? The newspeak worked. and to go from "artificially" to bots and fake accounts... OK, maybe. But how do you know? Not because they told you in that sentence, that's for sure.

> newspeak You guys keep using that word, but I don't think you know what it means. Twitter is a private company. Newspeak was a language developed by the government in Orwell's 1984. VERY different contexts here. For the record - what Twitter communicated is not clear and potentially deceptive, but this response wasn't written by some Twitter PR person. Some support person pressed a button and a canned twitter respo…

Yes, and the Dutch East India Company was just a trading operation that had no long-term repercussions on the world. They're both transnationals (something that is an abomination against humanity, in my opinion).

There is no good faith reason to be on Twitter's side unless:

1). You work there, and it aligns with your interests for your current employer to continue to operate and generate profit (likewise if you hold Twitter stock).

2). You genuinely believe Twitter is furthering your goals, and you believe your goals to be parallel with the common good.

Otherwise, Twitter is not a person with a life, emotions, and hardships. It's a hollow corporate shell that's only purpose is to generate profits for shareholders.

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#103

Post by motohagiography »

moralestapia wrote: post #53
motohagiography wrote: post #10

Is there a good case for why someone who doesn't use twitter would create an account and use it now? Trying to figure out what organic growth for them looks like.

A few months ago I created an account for a website I have, followed a few accounts, tweeted once and was then banned for literally no reason. All of this happened in less than 24h. After that, I try to avoid Twitter when possible. It's also a cesspool of entitled pseudo-intellectuals (both left and right leaning), so I don't miss it much, honestly.

My view is always a bit alien, but I get the sense if you follow the wrong person out of curiosity you get banned, which takes on weird reputation risk in itself. It seems like a vice anyway. A strange game, the only way to win is to be like everyone else.

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#104

Post by rosmax_1337 »

zouhair wrote: post #20

As a society we need to redefine what a public space is.

This is exactly the key in all conversations about banned accounts on private companies. In my opinion, either our habits regarding information intake using the internet needs to change, so that we use "the old commons" more often. (like real town squares)

Or there NEEDS to be a jurisdiction where if you are big enough, you can't just arbitrarily ban users from your space. The propagation of free thought and sound ideas depends on one of the points completely. There are huge problems, like how a company can be regulated when it is a global company. I don't want US law to facilitate Swedish spaces.

Honestly, the first idea where habits are formed back onto the "old commons" is probably the only real solution. But it's not exactly simple to change the habits of an entire planet.

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#106

Post by bko »

They also suspended Nancy Tracker [0], a twitter account tracking Nancy Pelosi's stock trades.

Something else I noticed that I think has changed is the follower counts on suspended accounts, which is only available on the app. It may have always been hidden on the web.

I get it, they're a private platform. But if they're acting on behalf of powerful state actors, how can we say that's not suppression on speech? The white house has admitted that they're in direct contact with social media platforms even going so far as tagging posts for "misinformation" [1]. In theory the state can't restrict the speech on social media. But in practice they don't even need to.

[0] https://twitter.com/NancyTracker

[1] https://mleverything.substack.com/p/what-would-government-ce...

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#109

Post by barney54 »

kube-system wrote: post #107
matheusmoreira wrote: post #82

> "artificially" amplifying information Isn't that the whole point of Twitter?

"artificial" is the key word -- it is referring to intentional manipulation rather than legitimate engagement.

And what does that mean?

Re: Twitter suspends account tracking Maxwell trial

#110

Post by paganel »

mbesto wrote: post #83
MrPatan wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> user "the account was “artificially” amplifying information". Where does it say the information was false in that sentence? The newspeak worked. and to go from "artificially" to bots and fake accounts... OK, maybe. But how do you know? Not because they told you in that sentence, that's for sure.

> newspeak You guys keep using that word, but I don't think you know what it means. Twitter is a private company. Newspeak was a language developed by the government in Orwell's 1984. VERY different contexts here. For the record - what Twitter communicated is not clear and potentially deceptive, but this response wasn't written by some Twitter PR person. Some support person pressed a button and a canned twitter respo…

I do know what newspeak means because I was directly subjected to it as a kid until late 1989 (am from Romania). In this instance the powers that be just outsourced their censorship to private entities for plausible deniability (I think that’s the correct term). Imo that makes it worse because while one can stage a revolution against a government that is seen as despotic the same cannot be done against private entities in a society like ours.
Post reply on HN