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

Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 347 posts

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#251

Post by rtpg »

cderwin wrote: post #231
maxerickson wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, it's perfectly reasonable to remove some disruptive individual from a lecture (think someone repeatedly shouting the name of a soda in order to disrupt the lecture, not an invited speaker). This is the same sort of removal of ideas from the marketplace that you are talking about, it's just probably not one you want to use as a test for what you have articulated.

The two are fundamentally different platforms. Twitter is an open space provided as a free service to the public at large, while a lecture is a fundamentally closed platform (only the lecturer speaks) only open to those enrolled in a specific class. That said, even in the example you give it is not always considered appropriate to remove people causing disruption. Consider, for example, a conservative speaker giving…

What about someone being disruptive at a open presentation? Or someone showing up to your local game meetup and being generally disagreeable?

What about a public park that has gotten ruined because someone keeps on doing donuts with their motorbike on the grass? A library whose books keep on getting ruined by certain people?

Even public services need to have some maintenance to not fall apart. There's a reason we call 4chan moderators "janitors".

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#252

Post by mullsork »

paulgb wrote: post #115
md224 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been saying this for a little while now: Twitter should really try to capitalize on Tweetstorms. What they don't seem to realize is that Tweetstorms enable Twitter to be a kind of inverse annotation platform. Most annotation platforms enable large chunks of text to be dissected by readers, but a Tweetstorm is the opposite: the author specifies the exact segmentation of the text as they release it, and each segme…

(Shameless plug) I've been working on an open-source tool to visualize twitter conversations and I've come to appreciate tweetstorms a bit more. Here's this tweetstorm visualized with the tool: https://s3.amazonaws.com/aws-website-staticfiles-25g9k/tvp.h...

Wow that's cool! Making it obvious which branch is part of the actual storm rather than someone replying would be nice. Once zoomed in my avatar recognition doesn't work as well.

Or maybe the tweet storm is always the left most branch and I just didn't realise that? :)

In any case super cool stuff!

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#253

Post by kbart »

IgorPartola wrote: post #233
inimino wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the election I've been spending time on HN and to a lesser extent Twitter. Every time I visit Twitter I find myself instinctively reaching for the downvote button, but there isn't one. About the only thing you can do when someone says (or retweets) something totally idiotic on Twitter is either unfollow, or, of course, reply. In other words, there is no way to register disapproval without simultaneously calling…

As a counter argument I present Reddit, which as a downcote button but is even more notorious for its abusive communities. Is it possible that HN is just more heavily represented by mature people who tend to communicate better than average and the Magic isn't really in the downvote algorithm?

Yes. I believe, users are they key. I don't know many online communities, where asking for "original, peer reviewed paper" just to prove your point is common.

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#255

Post by inimino »

IgorPartola wrote: post #233
inimino wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since the election I've been spending time on HN and to a lesser extent Twitter. Every time I visit Twitter I find myself instinctively reaching for the downvote button, but there isn't one. About the only thing you can do when someone says (or retweets) something totally idiotic on Twitter is either unfollow, or, of course, reply. In other words, there is no way to register disapproval without simultaneously calling…

As a counter argument I present Reddit, which as a downcote button but is even more notorious for its abusive communities. Is it possible that HN is just more heavily represented by mature people who tend to communicate better than average and the Magic isn't really in the downvote algorithm?

I should have mentioned: yes, the community is key. However the technology and the community together create the system. If the technology fails to support the community norms then the makeup of the community itself will shift. Once the elves start leaving middle-earth, it's difficult to recover.

Twitter is a little different because of its scale and the nature of its social graph. HN is a big room where everyone hears everyone else, Twitter is a giant switchboard where you plug in to choose your own mix.

Reddit seems to be something else, but I don't participate there so I don't know much.

Absolutely you are right that HN has a more mature mix of participants, but how does that situation continue? It cannot be solely by the direct efforts of the admins, however heroic, because the site is already too big for that.

The technical Magic has to complement the characteristics of the community.

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#256

Post by hyperdunc »

rtpg wrote: post #250
makomk wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter's problem isn't just that they have to fix harassment, it's that they have to do it without touching social justice activism that sure looks similar to it from the outside, right down to the doxing, threats, and smears. Oh, and they'll get no sympathy for getting this wrong as the difference is apparently obvious... except that everyone defines it differently (usually based on who their friends are) and simpl…

Twitter could simply "choose sides". Yes, they could have the courage to not allow neo-Nazis to use their site as a platform.

They might have the courage, but do they have the judgement to decide who's an actual neo-nazi?

Twitter has a history of political partisanship. They'll ban "racist" conservatives but allow minority "terrorist" organizations.

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#257

Post by AlwaysBCoding »

cekvenich3 wrote: post #114

Jack is now doing political activism. Against the administration.

Twitter's book burning of conservative accounts was horrific. One of the grossest displays from a tech company that I can remember. I have no idea how employees at Twitter aren't up in arms over it.

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#258

Post by SapphireSun »

wyck wrote: post #210
SapphireSun wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue, but it does seem like real damage might be done. I'm frankly worried about him starting a nuclear war. Most of our principles presuppose that the world won't end if we do something stupid. I'm not sure that assumption is valid in this case. EDIT: In nearly every other case, I am very pro-free speech. It 's an indicator of how shocking this is that I'm rethinking…

So you thing censorship is the answer to your irrational fears? Thank god we don't live in the 17th century or you would be burning people at the stake for the same reasons.

Why are my fears irrational? Are you saying he can't destroy most of human life on earth with the push of a button? We may disagree on his temperament, but the material fact remains.

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#259

Post by argonaut »

tyingq wrote: post #189
cbsmith wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you visit a tech company outside of the financial business... or really a ton of other companies.

So, Twitter VPs aren't company officers? Edit: Twitter's bylaws suggest that a VP is a company officer.

Twitter's bylaws (and those of the other companies) are ambiguous. They do not clearly say a VP = officer. They only use them in the sense that they mention them in the same sense.

Re: Twitter’s Chief Technology Officer to Leave Company

#260

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

morgante wrote: post #213
tyingq wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Outside of banks, a VP title usually means "company officer", and usually comes with perks and legal changes that do cost something.

Nope. I've been a VP without being an officer.

I know this may be naive, but what does the officer part entail or mean?
Post reply on HN