“Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”

Post by JumpCrisscross » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:48 PM UTC

jszymborski wrote: post #25

mikkergp wrote: post #7

This sort of justifies the viewpoint that despite all his bluster, Elon will probably run Twitter the way a "reasonable executive" would. Not just release the hounds. Keep the advertisers happy, but try to reduce the reliance on advertisers. Keep moderating content to reduce abuse, maybe eliminate the high profile banning but a person on the ground will have largely the same experience. (probably less action on more…

A bunch of accounts like The Babylon Bee and Ye have been unbanned w/o input from any such committee of diverse viewpoints. I don't have much faith that Musk will not act unilaterally in service of his friends and allies.

Post by mikkergp » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:49 PM UTC

wwweston wrote: post #71

mikkergp wrote: post #7

This sort of justifies the viewpoint that despite all his bluster, Elon will probably run Twitter the way a "reasonable executive" would. Not just release the hounds. Keep the advertisers happy, but try to reduce the reliance on advertisers. Keep moderating content to reduce abuse, maybe eliminate the high profile banning but a person on the ground will have largely the same experience. (probably less action on more…

> Elon will probably run Twitter the way a "reasonable executive" would. Take your originally intended actions and obscure responsibility for them until risks of accountability are sufficiently mitigated?

Post by PuppyTailWags » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:50 PM UTC

pjkundert wrote: post #76

uniqueuid wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested to learn how you think kmeans helps either diversity or hate speech detection. I don't think it helps with any of either, as people's behavior, the context, the language used and sensibilities change across cultures and over time. What you call hate speech now may not be in the future and may not have been in the past. The best you could hope for is creating a fuzzy representation of the most visibl…

The clustering responds to which tweets are up- and down-voted by the agent. And, the agent is moved closer to the clusters they like tweets from, and further from the clusters they dislike tweets from. The more diverse your likes (likes tweets in many other clusters), the broader and less restrictive your cluster weighting is -- the more variety you see. The more restrictive your selection, the less variety. You dec…

Post by ncallaway » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:52 PM UTC

unknownaccount wrote: post #79

TulliusCicero wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the US, there's a lot of noxious speech that's legal. The US has very permissive free speech laws overall.

And conversely the US is one of the most restrictive nations on earth when it comes to speech that supposedly infringes Copyrights or can be interpreted as defamation/slander. The premise that US has anything resembling freedom of speech is completely untrue.

Post by retrac » Fri, Oct 28, 2022, 7:53 PM UTC

PaulsWallet wrote: post #77

rootusrootus wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the real world, sure. The Internet would have us believe that civil war is imminent. We need to stop letting the 1% of people who bother to post online drive our national dialog. We have put the crazies in charge of the asylum.

> The Internet would have us believe that civil war is imminent. The person who could arguably be considered the third most powerful politician in the US just had their own broken into and their spouse assaulted in a suspected act of domestic terrorism. I wouldn't say "imminent" but if you don't think the possibility is at least somewhere on the table I would consider that being naive.