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

Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 311 posts

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#211

Post by jolux »

godelski wrote: post #198
jolux wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmmm, okay. I missed your point then. My bad.

Apparently, given how many downvotes I have, you aren't alone. Given that I'm agreeing with a lot of people that are arguing with me, I'm pretty sure it was my messaging. I think part of that is that since we are so politicized and language requires us to fill in parts that because I tried to dampen it to those on the right that it came off as supporting them. Pretty much my point was: this links to only stuff on the…

Yeah, except those aren't left wing sites. The problem is not the lack of balance, and I think your words keep making it seem like it is. There aren't reliable conservative sources on these issues, and the sources that are linked are all moderate. At this point conservatives will pretty much call anything or anyone that disagrees with them leftist, so it doesn't really matter what sources you put there so long as they're reflecting anything close to the truth.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#212

Post by Tagbert »

blhack wrote: post #78
archgoon wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Washington State. I mailed my vote in for the 2016 election; doing this is not unprecedented. Why aren't all the expat ballots not faked?

Yes and I live in Arizona and mailed in my ballot for the 2016 election. The point is not that it is possible to do some mail in voting. The point is that it isn't ridiculous to think that mail in voting could be succeptible to fraud. Certainly not so much so that twitter should be trying to influence an election in this way.

Except that we have several years of experience with mail-in voting in states like Oregon, Washington and others. No one has ever uncovered any impactful voter fraud.

Paper-based voting like this is very hard to hack or commit fraud on a scale that is large enough to have an effect. If you were to fill out your aunt’s ballot, as someone suggested, it would have a nearly unmeasurable effect.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#213

Post by jolux »

sfj wrote: post #205
jolux wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of deplatforming is not to change the minds of true believers in extremist causes, it’s to hinder their ability to recruit.

“The more you tighten your grasp, the more star systems slip through your fingers.” Censoring the point of view of others merely lends credence to their point of view. Unless you find a way to censor them completely, you will cause more and more people to lose faith in your ideals.

Got any proof of that?

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#214

Post by Tagbert »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #202
slg wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP edited their post, but they were talking about methods to change maybe one or two dozen votes at a time. The minimum number of votes that you would need to reverse the 2016 presidential election was 107k. That was if you had perfect polling going in and knew exactly what votes to change. In practice you would likely need to change several hundred thousand votes if not over a million. This process would need to be…

No one here is even considering a nation state working to change the outcome of an election. A spy network might get away with it.

Online voting could be vulnerable to such an attack but paper-based voting such as is used by mail in voting is very low tech and distributed. hacking and fraud are hard to scale in that case.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#215

Post by throwaway122378 »

kasey_junk wrote: post #172
throwaway122378 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for picking on specifics. The evidence is clear and endless. Mail in voting is susceptible to more fraud. Period. https://www.dailybreeze.com/government-and-politics/20161103...

Lol that story doesn’t show mail in voter fraud either. It shows a systems issue that’s being investigated by the proper authorities with no votes counted. You really are bad at this. Here let me help you. The Heritage foundation has a database of proven voter fraud (all forms) https://www.heritage.org/election-integrity/commentary/datab... They capture a little more than 300 examples of voter fraud (all forms) in a…

Thanks for proving my point all by yourself

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#216

Post by IAmEveryone »

[deleted] wrote: post #185
Barrin92 wrote: post #3

If we're honest a lot of his tweets violate twitters content policy and they do so blatantly. I wonder if they'll ever have the guts to straight up hand him at least a temp ban.

[deleted]

I have no idea what you're trying to prove. In any case: anti-white racism isn't the same as standard-issue anti-black racism.

Racism is more than some people not liking your particular skin color on Twitter. Being black means every police encounter is potentially lethal––see today's news, or that jogger two weeks ago for recent examples. People call the cops when you're birding in Central Park, and unless you're lucky and have a recording, they aren't going to believe you.

If, perchance, some virus starts going around, you'll find the hospitals in predominantly black neighbourhoods have less staff and equipment, and the 30% black people in your city make up 60% of the dead (Chicago, Detroit).

In other words: it's systematic, and about power. That stuff on Twitter is stupid, but it isn't equivalent.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#217

Post by godelski »

jolux wrote: post #211
godelski wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, given how many downvotes I have, you aren't alone. Given that I'm agreeing with a lot of people that are arguing with me, I'm pretty sure it was my messaging. I think part of that is that since we are so politicized and language requires us to fill in parts that because I tried to dampen it to those on the right that it came off as supporting them. Pretty much my point was: this links to only stuff on the…

Yeah, except those aren't left wing sites. The problem is not the lack of balance, and I think your words keep making it seem like it is. There aren't reliable conservative sources on these issues, and the sources that are linked are all moderate. At this point conservatives will pretty much call anything or anyone that disagrees with them leftist, so it doesn't really matter what sources you put there so long as the…

> Yeah, except those aren't left wing sites.

I believe most people would consider them left wing. But that doesn't matter because it is a matter of perspective.

> he problem is not the lack of balance, and I think your words keep making it seem like it is.

The problem isn't that, the problem is I was saying that this is going to happen (which didn't take very long):

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/12654275381401886...

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#218

Post by FriendlyNormie »

thomascgalvin wrote: post #96
jccalhoun wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And by public interest he means the valuation of his company when all the Trump fans revolt and leave twitter.

You can make a genuine case that it's important for the American people to have open proof that their President is an unhinged shitheal actively courting neo-nazis in his bid to undo all progress that has been made in this country in the past fifty years.

No post body was provided.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#219

Post by sfj »

jolux wrote: post #213
sfj wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“The more you tighten your grasp, the more star systems slip through your fingers.” Censoring the point of view of others merely lends credence to their point of view. Unless you find a way to censor them completely, you will cause more and more people to lose faith in your ideals.

Got any proof of that?

All the new alternative social networks and video sites that have cropped up and the old ones that have ben gaining in popularity is evidence that people are beginning to turn away. Ex. lbry.tv, bitchute.com, gab.com, voat.co, phuks.co, zerohedge.com

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#220

Post by [deleted] »

sfj wrote: post #219
jolux wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Got any proof of that?

All the new alternative social networks and video sites that have cropped up and the old ones that have ben gaining in popularity is evidence that people are beginning to turn away. Ex. lbry.tv, bitchute.com, gab.com, voat.co, phuks.co, zerohedge.com

[deleted]
Post reply on HN