Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve • Hacker News Board

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#201

Post by jlebar » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:39 PM UTC

noxer wrote: post #155

pjc50 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> disagreeing but supporting that someone should be able voice their opinion anyway It's not just "disagreement" but the death threats, slurs, allegations of "grooming", racism, libel, and simple fraud (especially involving cryptocurrency). Heck, Musk himself posted (and deleted shortly afterwards) libel about Pete Pelosi.

If it isn't a crime or spam then it is in fact disagreement. There is no inherent different from calling someone a "racist" or "nazi" to calling someone a "groomer". On Twitter these "slurs" are used by different sides (bubbles) but other than that there is no difference. It might be a baseless allegation or there could be more to it but either way it is clearly an opinion and disagreeing is fine no need to prevent a…

> What is so hard about the concept of allowing people to be wrong about things?

Because democratic society requires us to agree on basic facts in order to function.

"People are wrong about" things like:

- who got more votes in the last US presidential election

- whether future elections in the US will be fair

- whether global warming is real

- whether Democratic politicians are literal lizard people who molest children

We have seen that when we can't agree on these basic facts, people take actions like

- attempting to overthrow the seat of government

- attempted assassination of political figures (or their spouses)

- election of politicians who say that they will overthrow elections that don't go in favor of their party

- enacting policies that threaten to create a climate catastrophe.

The reason that Musk's tweet at Hillary repeating the conspiracy theory that Paul Pelosi's assailant was a male prostitute is a problem is because, in providing an alternative (false) explanation for the attack, it contributes to hiding the truth on this issue. The truth being that we can draw a straight line from politicians' words to this attack.

And since we vote for those politicians, if people are wrong about this, then yeah, it does matter.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#202

Post by stormbrew » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:40 PM UTC

All I really want is to get off the "the user is the product" rollercoaster. It's been nothing but a disaster for everyone and I don't think it's necessary.

"One big social network to rule them all" is an induced need. When you let go of the idea that everyone needs to be in the same room screaming at the top of their lungs to be heard you can let go of a lot of other toxic bullshit we've all let ourselves get accustomed to.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#203

Post by oneeyedpigeon » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:40 PM UTC

amatecha wrote: post #129

mFixman wrote: post #14

I used to agree with you until I created a new Twitter account from scratch. I'm not American and I specifically put non-political things in my interests. Yet, the second I signed up I got the following: 1. A notification about a smug reply a rando made to a Republican Congressman. 2. Posts from a meme page with a Pepe the frog avatar showing homeless people fighting in San Francisco. 3. Somebody I don't follow accus…

Conversely I signed up for Mastodon and saw a ton of awesome technical content, geeky chatter and exactly zero hostility or toxicity. Has been that way for the past few years. (Though, a smaller instance, not mastodon.social)

Mastodon really, really needs to work on its PR. Every time I see someone talking about it on twitter, they're trying to work out what the significance of choosing a particular server is. Even a message as simple as "Like email, but social" might help alleviate this.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#204

Post by freedomben » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:43 PM UTC

mFixman wrote: post #114

paulusthe wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's definitely the problem, but the answer isn't to change Twitter's algorithms. We must ask why Twitter's algorithms ended up where they did, and the answer is that it's more profitable to do what Twitter does than the alternative. It's not like Twitter's creators maliciously set out to become the flaming hellscape it is now. It responded to market forces and user behavior. Neither of those factors have changed,…

Back in 2007 Hotmail was so big that it was profitable for them to have accounts that deleted themselves if you didn't log in in a couple of months and not pay too much attention to spam filtering. Then Gmail came along and ate their lunch. TikTok is winning the race for zoomers' attention by doing better content filtering. I'm sure that a well-ran Twitter competitor can take all of their market.

This is a great observation and link to hotmail. I suspect there's some serious valuable lessons to be learned by brainstorming on the similarities/differences there.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#205

Post by jl6 » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:45 PM UTC

danaris wrote: post #185

hbn wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Left-wing twitter is calling everyone nazis and right-wing twitter is calling everyone pedophiles. Enjoy the nuanced discussion.

[flagged]

The nuanced discussion can be enjoyed here too!

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#206

Post by tkk23 » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:45 PM UTC

>we need to look into why these things are happening. It does not seem like a technical problem [...]. It's more of a personal, interpersonal and a social problem

Should society adapt to the social networks or should the social networks adapt to society?

Social networks make the problems of society visible. Does this mean that all social problems have to be resolved? Social networks can also be designed in a way that society can continue as it is.

Even if it is necessary to resolve the personal and social problems, how could they be resolved without technology? There are no new problems, they are just more visible. If researchers haven't resolved them until now, chances are that they won't resolve them soon without game-changing new technology.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#207

Post by danaris » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:45 PM UTC

freedomben wrote: post #199

danaris wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> a significant proportion of the American right wing is, by any meaningful, objective definition, substantially aligned with the Nazi party, fully on board with authoritarian fascism, and ready and willing to murder people for opposing them. Are you being serious or missing a /s?

If you think that this needs a /s, you have not been paying attention to the news in recent months.

ETA: Just as a for instance, the inept assassination attempt on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi the other day that sent her husband to the hospital.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#208

Post by oneeyedpigeon » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:47 PM UTC

edent wrote: post #13

I disagree. Your points aren't necessarily wrong, but they ignore one big factor. Twitter chooses what content to promote to people. I could use Twitter quite happily not knowing about the latest "scandal" in, say, the knitting world. But Twitter actively promotes that content to me - either with the "trending" sidebar or by showing me content that it thinks will increase my engagement. That is a technical problem. H…

I blocked the trending sidebar ages ago and my twitter experience is utterly non-toxic. I don't think I ever see anything I wouldn't want/expect to see. The only time it comes close is when twitter switches my default view from 'Latest' back to 'Home' - it always dawns on me when that happens because stuff gets 'weird', but I don't think it ever goes as far as 'hostile'.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#209

Post by boplicity » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:50 PM UTC

csours wrote: post #153

boplicity wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "The algorithm" is mostly humans clicking buttons. Actually, the algorithm is not the button clicks, but the code that interprets those button clicks. I don't think many people notice this, but HN gives a bonus to longer posts, in terms of keeping them at the top. It's not just the upvotes that determine which votes surface to the top. There are probably other signals that are inputted into the algorithm, as well,…

You work on a forum - it is by design limited to some area(s) of focus. Twitter is not like that. I think forums are great. I think forums are better than Twitter, because they can have some focus. I think social media probably doesn't scale, because social groups will always surface conflict. I think you can design those algorithms if you know what area(s) your community cares about. Twitter cares about everything.

The algorithms I've designed are in no way aware of the content of the post -- and they have worked as intended; reducing the amount of inflammatory posts that are surfaced. I don't see how, in this case, large social companies can't implement similar, content agnostic algorithms.

There are very simple signals of "quality" that are not based on the actual content beyond the length of the post. It's not that different than search algorithms, actually, which don't have the same problem with surfacing inflammatory posts.

Yes, those signal may be wrong in some contexts, but the signals that are currently being used are certainly wrong in many contexts right now, hence this discussion.

Re: Tell HN: The issues of Twitter are not a technical problem to solve

#210

Post by noxer » Tue, Nov 01, 2022, 5:52 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #162

noxer wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it isn't a crime or spam then it is in fact disagreement. There is no inherent different from calling someone a "racist" or "nazi" to calling someone a "groomer". On Twitter these "slurs" are used by different sides (bubbles) but other than that there is no difference. It might be a baseless allegation or there could be more to it but either way it is clearly an opinion and disagreeing is fine no need to prevent a…

> What is so hard about the concept of allowing people to be wrong about things? People act on that basis? If all this stuff was totally disconnected from the real world, then sure yeah whatever, but it isn't. The point is that Pete Pelosi was attacked by a terrorist who'd be radicalized by wrong information. The "groomer" stuff worries me because I know enough queer people who are now more likely to face real, physi…

I'm not responsible for people acting on whatever basis they do unless I actively blackmail or incite them to do something.

>The point is that Pete Pelosi was attacked by a terrorist who'd be radicalized by wrong information.

Where exactly is the point in this? Clearly this happen before Musk's post about it so where exactly is the connection?

>The "groomer" stuff worries me...

I could tell by reading your post but I dont see any argument contrary to what I said. Its just another insult/not nice thing to say/a lie/etc. but there is nothing special about it.

It might "worry" or rather "bothers" you more that other words but that is purely subjective, we all have some kind of personal ranking of "slurs". But what matters is that I would not want the words on the top of my list banned. Not even if used against me.

>... and do nothing which can affect me...

Then we could not have this discussion because clearly it will affects you. I can try to not affect you negative but it might not work and trying is complete voluntary, its up to you to not participate in this discussion if you think I'm not interested in a civil rational exchange of thoughts. You can not demand from me or from anyone to limit their speech to what does not affect you negative. That is impossible to practice.

What others do is even more outside my control. I am not responsible for other peoples action (with certain limitation see first sentence). And I'm not going to limit my speech or want anyone else to limit their speech as a "preventive action" to stop a hypothetical person doing something wrong. That is entirely backwards, the open dialog, scrutiny and tolerance is what should make people not becoming extremists. Preventing people from having their views challenged isn't going to help anyone in the long run.