131–140 of 352 posts
It's a totally ridiculous situation and their media messaging doesn't help at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's like a privately owned shopping mall telling the anti-abortion protestors to move on. The mall owners probably like free speech as a concept and may even be anti-abortion themselves, but people yelling and waving objectionable banners around upset the other customers and are interfering with the business the mall owners are trying to operate.
Twitter is a platform for people to communicate and you can't easily move your followers. This would be more like the giant local mall booting out shop operators based on their political views.
> and you can't easily move your followers
So you mean people will keep using Twitter even if they delete some tweets?
I'd suspect it's more likely that United and their twitter drone army are "reporting the tweet(s)" as "abusive or harmful" and if enough twitter users do that it would make sense that twitter would auto-remove / moderate said tweet.
Of course, it's strange that the originators of the tweet don't get notified or see their tweet after moderation - so I'm likely wrong.
[0]:http://time.com/4731403/twitter-donald-trump-alt-uscis-lawsu...
I'll definitely not be flying United or Delta ever again after this incident. Over-selling spaces on a plane is a scummy practice and shokldn't be allowed. When someone needs to cancel they still pocket the change fee or keep tne entire fee if they miss the flight. Seems like borderline fraud.
I've seen a lot of people with this type of attitude, but I honestly don't buy it for a second. Airline customers don't have any brand loyalty - all they care about is that $10 they save. If you're serious about boycotting United and Delta then you'll also need to boycott the following airlines that codeshare: United Airlines Trans States Holdings United Airlines Commute Air United Airlines ExpressJet United Airlines…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You seem to have added to c4n4rd's post the assertion that this is OK. I don't think it was intended that way. The point is not "This is ok because it lines Twitter's pockets", it is more "This is why it is happening. What else did you expect?"
I think we should expect more, the same way we'd expect food producers to not poison us and truck operators to not run us over. Twitter has become a major platform for public discourse (including elections) and needs to at least have some transparency into their deletion and shadowbanning decisions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems like we are going full steam into a dystopian society Gonna have to roll my eyes pretty hard at this. These are privately owned servers, they can delete whatever content they want off of them, if you don't like it, you're totally free to host your own server and content.
Yeah, you can set up your own server and "content", but it ain't gunna be like Twitter, because that's where the people are. Network effects make it very hard to launch a competitor Twitter is an incredibly important communication medium; as an example, it almost certainly was instrumental in electing Trump to the presidency. Just because it's privately owned doesn't mean we should be content to have it run like a pe…
Perhaps, but that's not an inherent property of twitter itself, it just happens that people are there now, but the same could be said about Digg 6 years ago, or myspace 12 years ago or ICQ 20 years ago, people move around the web as trends come and go. Maybe your competitor will be the next big one, but you're not entitled to a network effect just because you don't like twitter, and neither are you entitled to dictate twitter's prerogatives just because twitter happens to be popular as of April 2017.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tweeter and all others you mentioned are private corporations. Their goal is to turn profit to their shareholders - NOTHING MORE. He who believes these companies exist as a way for the mass population to voice their opinion and as a way to exercise democracy should rethink what these companies are all about. Note: I do not necessarily agree with that they do, just pointing out what they are all about.
> Tweeter and all others you mentioned are private corporations. Their goal is to turn profit to their shareholders - NOTHING MORE. Not sure what that's supposed to mean. Would it be OK for a food company to use expired ingredients if it increased their profit, or for FedEx trucks to run over people if it helped their bottom line? Private corporations have various degrees of responsibility to the general public, depe…
http://abcnews.go.com/Lifestyle/inside-bostons-expired-food-...
I used to go into a small store when I was a kid and ask for the expired bread. They'd come out of the back with and entire friggin garbage bag full of bread that 'expired' yesterday. That bag was $1.
FedEx truck running over people is illegal whereas Christian bookstores only stocking pro-Christian material is perfectly legal and good business.
As Bruce Schneier said, the one thing they did right after 9/11 was to make the cock-pit doors reinforced and locked from the inside.
Do you think rich people on their own jets get TSA patdowns the same way? No. What we are creating is a state of freedom for the rich, and compliant abuse for the majority of the citizens.
Since the new TSA regulations, I have only flown twice, for these very reasons. The first time I was so outraged at the scanners I was going to protest, but they just sent me through an old school metal detector and I was on my way. The second time, I only got the scanner leaving London, and being in a different country I knew I didn't have the same rights of protest as in the US.
I once called in to NPR while in D.C. when they had a TSA guy on the air. I asked if it wasn't an obvious conflict of interest for the guy at TSA who approved the scanner purchase to immediately go to work for that scanner company, and referenced the above Bruce Schneier quote. I got some deft wiggling out of an answer and my number was blocked the next time I tried to call into an NPR show. (not calling too much, had called in maybe 4 times in the past six months)
It's like someone somewhere said, "the terrorists can't take our freedoms if we take them away first!" (Of course, the real terrorists are the bankers and financiers)
We need to rethink the patriot act, the TSA, homeland security, NDAA, AUMF, and every other peice of legislation the corrupt and/or blackmailed congress allowed to pass (in violation of their oaths) in the clamor post 9/11.