Live data from Hacker News

The tyranny of the supertweeter

omnibudsman.substack.com

251–259 of 259 posts

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting how you see people "leaving" careers in the CIA and NSA for posts in news organizations.

How would one "see" that?

It's been in the news. There've been over a dozen high profile agency staffers who have left for CNN, MSNBC, etc just in the last few years.

CNN has: James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, James Baker, Josh Campbell, Asha Rangappa, Steven Hall, Phil Mudd, Susan Hennessy, Samantha Vinograd & James Gagliano

MSNBC has: John Brennan, Frank Figliuzzi, Chuck Rosenberg, Malcolm Nance & Jeremy Bash

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#252
post #16

A classic on this topic, more general: Most of Most of What You Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People [1]. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most...

I know the article doesn't literally mean "insane" as in mental illness, but it reminded me of something that happened long ago and its implications for the internet. My buddy and I were watching a news show and it had a number to call in and "leave your opinion" - super common back in the 90's. Well, we called and it was a voicemail box. You guess what happened next, but we correctly guessed the admin code and could…

Interesting story!

There is one major difference between then and now though; back in the '90s, those nutty voicemails never made it into the public domain, and thus those "ideas" were unable to spread.

In 2022, political rallies are playing Qanon theme music, because they know exactly how well those ideas have spread.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/18/us/politics/trump-rally-q...

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#253
post #25

Is this tool feasible? Block user @A, and also block any user who has chosen to `follow` user @A. Ideally: > twitprune --block --recursive --depth 2 @A Edit: API Review Time!

Well, there's a similar action: https://megablock.xyz/ > Don't like a bad tweet? Block the tweet, its author, and every single person who liked it—in one click.

The new head of YCombinator can probably attest to its effectiveness [0]

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32639125

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#254

Every time I think about how to improve Twitter I inevitably conclude the simplest solution that generates the most net good for the world is to remove it from the internet. This is true for virtually all social media, however. The way these networking sites are set up is practically an invitation to bad actors and social engineers to manipulate large swathes of society, or at best, simply exploit people for advertis…

Censorship? Well, it works for China! /s

I don't disagree by the way, social media algos are primed to keep people on the site/app, and the only way they can do it is with a intermittent streams of negativity with the occasional positive, fun interaction.

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#255

Every time I think about how to improve Twitter I inevitably conclude the simplest solution that generates the most net good for the world is to remove it from the internet. This is true for virtually all social media, however. The way these networking sites are set up is practically an invitation to bad actors and social engineers to manipulate large swathes of society, or at best, simply exploit people for advertis…

Censorship? Well, it works for China! /s

I don't disagree by the way, social media algos are primed to keep people on the site/app, and the only way they can do it is with a intermittent streams of negativity with the occasional positive, fun interaction.

They wouldn't have to do this if they didn't need people to watch as many ads as possible. So perhaps the solution is a version of Twitter that can exist without monetization.

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've argued that Likes are evil and should be banned. I've tried in some places to remove them from my life. Via ublock-origin I have them blocked from HN beacuse I feel the rush of elation everytime I see I've posted somethign that gets even a few up votes and I can feel it addicting me to wanting to seek out more of that. I've done the same on stackoverflow when I used to post their a lot. I hid other people's scor…

Fine, here's your upvo- oh, wait... More seriously, I can see how these are useful in situations where there is just too much content to sort through (hacker news, reddit, slashdot... google ?). Of course you can also have randomly displayed results, but then this goes against the goal of elevating the quality of the results, at which point you need to pick winners and losers somehow . (Obviously, the traditional way…

After using the internet and nested thread style sites for way, way too long, I've finally comes to the conclusion that we had it right the first time with mailing lists, e-bulletin boards, forums, and imageboards: chronological, oldest to newest is the best way to read these threads.

Not only does it disincentivize the bad behavior we are talking about, but it also has the unique effect of giving you an intuitive meta perspective on a thread, and you get to see how older threads affected newer ones, as they happen. It feels way more organic, even if you aware that all the other commenters are trapped in the algorithm box.

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fine, here's your upvo- oh, wait... More seriously, I can see how these are useful in situations where there is just too much content to sort through (hacker news, reddit, slashdot... google ?). Of course you can also have randomly displayed results, but then this goes against the goal of elevating the quality of the results, at which point you need to pick winners and losers somehow . (Obviously, the traditional way…

After using the internet and nested thread style sites for way, way too long, I've finally comes to the conclusion that we had it right the first time with mailing lists, e-bulletin boards, forums, and imageboards: chronological, oldest to newest is the best way to read these threads. Not only does it disincentivize the bad behavior we are talking about, but it also has the unique effect of giving you an intuitive me…

Oh yeah, I prefer forums too, they work great... until too much people want to comment on the same topic. Then they quickly become unusable for in-depth conversation, in a similar way that chats become for any conversation (except emote spam).

But now I realize that there is also option of a purely chronological tree view (WordPress comments, some mailing lists...) that can go very far in mitigating this - I wonder why it's not more common ?

(I might still be better if it defaulted to random roots, at least on your first visit, to avoid the incentives for people posting as quick as possible...)

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#258
post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, come on! The title of that article is, verbatim: "The racist backlash to The Little Mermaid and Lord of The Rings is exhausting and extremely predictable" Are you seriously arguing in good faith that you were fooled into thinking that this was a piece of objective journalism? You are providing a perfect example of my point, which I'll endure the downvotes to point out: rather than see an opnion article with which…

I'm arguing that I literally do not understand the distinction you're drawing. In my mind, "news", "reporting", and "journalism" encompass all articles written by news organizations about current events. I wasn't fooled into thinking this was a piece of objective journalism, but I did think it's a piece of non -objective journalism, albeit one where I ultimately agree with the author's thesis. But you seem to be sayi…

Not the OP, but here's my understanding.

> What is the shape of this "not journalism at all" category? How can I distinguish non-journalism from non-objective journalism or journalism on a topic I don't personally think is important?

For the NYTimes, anything from the opinion section, anything the second half of the category list (Arts, Books, Style, Food, Travel, Magazine, etc.) I would consider is held to a lesser standard than the first half (World, U.S., Politics, N.Y., Business). Also, articles in those sections were less likely to be about current events specifically, and might include reviews, interviews, and other content that isn't "of the day". The Opinion section is actually a nice divider.

> Do news organizations offer any explicit disclaimers that their "non-journalism" has low editorial standards and shouldn't be trusted the same way as their journalism? Or is it just something you have to know?

Outside of explicit tagging of Opinion pieces as such, no. In the old days, in paper form, you generally knew that anything in section A was solid journalism, other than the opinion pieces in the back, and in Column 1 of the front page. Section B (Local news), was usually okay, but could get a little weak further to the back. Section C (Sports) was good on game facts, but other stuff could be weak. Section D (Business) was usually good again, but was much more likely to also include PR fluff pieces and other similar stuff. Section E and beyond (Arts/Calendar, Comics, etc.) was all less serious. Parade Magazine, an insert that showed up in many publications across the US was complete garbage.

> * Does the average media-literate person know any of this?

Most people knew about the opinions section, it was pretty clear back then that the paper didn't stand behind those pieces, and they only represented their author's opinion. The feel of each section and the advertisements included therein did give some sense of the importance of the section.

I have felt for some time that the loss of the metadata around opinion pieces has done real damage to Journalism, and that it would be good for publications to come up with some standard for identifying that, to reduce the instances of breathless reports of "The Washington Post is a socialist rag!" after a single opinion piece by an actual socialist is published.

Re: The tyranny of the supertweeter

#259
post #16

A classic on this topic, more general: Most of Most of What You Read on the Internet is Written by Insane People [1]. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most...

I know the article doesn't literally mean "insane" as in mental illness, but it reminded me of something that happened long ago and its implications for the internet. My buddy and I were watching a news show and it had a number to call in and "leave your opinion" - super common back in the 90's. Well, we called and it was a voicemail box. You guess what happened next, but we correctly guessed the admin code and could…

Robert Anton Wilson's "Illuminatus" books were borne from his time as an editor for Penthouse's letters-to-the-editor section, where he had the same experience.

In writing the story, took all of the crazy conspiracy letters and entertained the idea of "what if every single one were true?"

Post reply on HN