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

Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

blog.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 504 posts

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#201

Post by trs8080 »

spamuel wrote: post #189
cyberphobe wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.newsweek.com/activists-accuse-elon-musk-banning-... mentions a few, although there are far more.

You need to be more specific - he wasn't banning George Takei or Occupy Democrats. He banned ANTIFA accounts that were being used to plan "direct action", ie: riots. Something that was previously against Twitter's TOS, but it wasn't being enforced specifically against ANTIFA accounts because Twitter employees were sympathetic to the cause.

Answered above, reproducing for you here:

"As the Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin noted on Twitter, the suspended users include Chad Loder, an antifascist researcher whose open-source investigation of the U.S. Capitol riot led to the identification and arrest of a masked Proud Boy who attacked police officers. The account of video journalist Vishal Pratap Singh, who reports on far-right protests in Southern California, has also been suspended."

"All four accounts had been singled out for criticism by Andy Ngo, a far-right writer whose conspiratorial, error-riddled reporting on left-wing protests and social movements fuels the mass delusion that a handful of small antifascist groups are part of an imaginary shadow army called “antifa.” In a public exchange on Twitter on Friday, Musk invited Ngo to report “Antifa accounts” that should be suspended directly to him."

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#202

Post by memish »

jeffbee wrote: post #172
memish wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking of "pretending", that is false on both counts.

Twitter 2.0 is banning accounts as soon as Andy Ngo, the galaxy's biggest liar, demands they be banned. https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...

I don't see how you reached that conclusion. If you look at the referenced thread, he was reporting accounts that were inciting violence.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#203

Post by ska »

sithlord wrote: post #83
squaredot wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's about marketing, the A/B testing they do, not science.

what is not scientific about it? maybe its not good science, but it is science. really almost anything is science... Science is just observation and experimentation. Science doesn't dictate how you do the above. Now, someone would find it impossible to reproduce your findings, but - that would just suggest bad science

> Science is just observation and experimentation.

That's not enough. If you don't include some sense of both 'systematic' and 'rigorous' (and yes, these terms are slippery), you aren't doing science.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#204

Post by threeseed »

felipesoc wrote: post #88

> First, none of our policies have changed. Our approach to policy enforcement will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content: freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach. They recently unbanned many controversial accounts based solely on Twitter polls. Who do they expect will believe these statements?

Musk also asked people to report suspected Antifa accounts to Andy Ngo a right-wing conservative journalist.

All of whom have now been suspended despite there being no infringement on terms of service.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#205

Post by CameronNemo »

felipesoc wrote: post #88

> First, none of our policies have changed. Our approach to policy enforcement will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content: freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach. They recently unbanned many controversial accounts based solely on Twitter polls. Who do they expect will believe these statements?

And banned accounts when fringe far right "journalists" complained about them.

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/29/elon-musk-twitter-andy-n...

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#206

Post by UncleOxidant »

threeseed wrote: post #204
felipesoc wrote: post #88

> First, none of our policies have changed. Our approach to policy enforcement will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content: freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach. They recently unbanned many controversial accounts based solely on Twitter polls. Who do they expect will believe these statements?

Musk also asked people to report suspected Antifa accounts to Andy Ngo a right-wing conservative journalist. All of whom have now been suspended despite there being no infringement on terms of service.

> Musk also asked people to report suspected Antifa accounts to Andy Ngo a right-wing conservative journalist.

Is there a source on that? Because if so, holy crap... but I'd like to see some evidence.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#207

Post by [deleted] »

PM_me_your_math wrote: post #141
snapcaster wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see comments like this frequently on hackernews and i'm curious on your motivation. Do you actually use twitter so this comment isn't lining up with your expectations? Do you not use twitter and expect this person to justify their experience by doing further research? What is _actually_ motivating you to comment like this?

In order presented: Yes. No. You mean, it is not obvious? I am motivated by curiosity. A claim was made that is not supported. It isn't unreasonable to request such a claim to be validated by demonstration. Personally, I have not seen an increase in "hate" or violence or bigotry or any other -ism or -ist. I've seen people disagree in a much more whole-hearted way, while at the same time, seeing prompts for reducing t…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#208

Post by threeseed »

bilbo0s wrote: post #154
jonfw wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anybody would agree with you given the following two assumptions- That these previously banned users were banned for conduct that they would consider hateful That banning users is the only way to keep the platform safe from hateful conduct If twitter disagrees with either of these statements, you can see why they would disagree with your point

Problem in the long run is that it doesn't matter whether or not Twitter believes they are hateful. Heck, it doesn't even matter if the person you're responding to thinks they are hateful. For Musk to not lose gobs and gobs of money, it only matters whether advertisers, in their sole estimation, consider those people hateful. The guys with the nine figure ad budgets will almost certainly fall on the "cautious" side o…

> The only thing that will help here is finding small, less PR minded brands or businesses to replace the players in the nine figure club.

My partner runs a small business that spends a few million on ads each year.

Why would she take the risk (and it is a huge risk) of advertising on Twitter when Facebook, Google etc. give her the confidence and results her business depends on. Smaller businesses are far less likely to take risks.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#209

Post by MarcoZavala »

trs8080 wrote: post #200
toolz wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which rule following accounts on the left have been banned since musk bought the company? I only know of a couple accounts that were banned for very clearly violating terms of service, i.e. impersonating other people. I personally don't agree with even those bans, but I am curious to know which rule followers were banned.

"As the Los Angeles City Councilmember Mike Bonin noted on Twitter, the suspended users include Chad Loder, an antifascist researcher whose open-source investigation of the U.S. Capitol riot led to the identification and arrest of a masked Proud Boy who attacked police officers. The account of video journalist Vishal Pratap Singh, who reports on far-right protests in Southern California, has also been suspended." "Al…

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter 2.0: Our continued commitment to the public conversation

#210

Post by QuantumGood »

felipesoc wrote: post #88

> First, none of our policies have changed. Our approach to policy enforcement will rely more heavily on de-amplification of violative content: freedom of speech, but not freedom of reach. They recently unbanned many controversial accounts based solely on Twitter polls. Who do they expect will believe these statements?

On November 23, Twitter stopped enforcing its "COVID-19 misleading information" policy.

The previous policy received acclaim from medical professionals: In an advisory to technology platforms, US Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy cited Twitter’s rules as an example of what companies should do to combat misinformation. When journalist Kara Swisher in September 2020 confronted Musk with the possibility that many people could die if they didn’t follow public health recommendations, the man who believes he is making cars safer and saving mankind by going to Mars replied bluntly: “Everybody dies.”

The argument could be made that Elon cares more about virtual, future people than actual people living today.

Post reply on HN