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

X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

disruptionist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 834 posts

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#341

Post by _heimdall »

nomilk wrote: post #72
masklinn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect they've reached the stage where they don't even need to pretend to pay lip service to their notional values. It took 6 weeks for that milk to rot: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2022_Twitter_suspensi...

X/Twitter should publicly provide a suspension reason - that would help a lot in verifying whether the account did/did not break TOS. A justification [0] of sorts is provided for the journalist suspensions: > Criticizing me all day long is totally fine, but doxxing my real-time location and endangering my family is not [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2022_Twitter_suspensi...

That's not a new problem though, platforms have been kicking people off with no clear reason for years.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#342

Post by aredox »

userbinator wrote: post #28
jgaa wrote: post #7

So much for Elons "Free Speech"! This may come as a shock to him: Free Speech means to allow people to say something that he disagree with. Something that may hurt his interests or even his ego. Free speech is not to allow people to say things he agree with or don't care about.

[flagged]

Good of you to admit that Musk is as bad as what you hated in the past.

I would even argue he's worse.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#343

Post by Moru »

_heimdall wrote: post #336
xzjis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Freedom of speech" on Twitter is nothing more than Newspeak for censorship. In reality, the goal has always been to silence minorities who already struggle to express themselves, while allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant. It is a form of indirect censorship, through the self-censorship of minorities who fear speaking out. Then comes direct censorship, where certain terms or lin…

Freedom of speech, at least in the US, is a concern specifically with the government censoring citizens' speech. The Twitter files are a recent example of the government partnering with private corps to censor, so that's a fair argument, but in general a private company can't violate free speech by deciding what kind of content they want allowed. Is it shitty that they censor? Absolutely. But is it a constitutional v…

The owner is working for the government, can't play that card any more.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#344

Post by aredox »

alt227 wrote: post #245
immibis wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't criticize Elon on X...

Elon literally said: "Criticizing me all day long is totally fine" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2022_Twitter_suspensi...

Another lie in the long list of lies from his mouth.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#345

Post by jdsleppy »

lenkite wrote: post #224
j-bos wrote: post #113

This comment section has turned into something of a circle, it's cool to be mad nd all, but there was a comment expressing doubt at the details, wonder about a reason other than those stated, and asking if anyone independently verified, as I clicked it the comment was flagged to oblivion. No opportunity to engage with that viewpoint.

[flagged]

Apparently the 150 year old Social Security recipients were due to a COBOL quirk where the zero datetime is 1875. Interesting, but not fraud.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#346

Post by JohnMakin »

dettil wrote: post #324
xzjis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Freedom of speech" on Twitter is nothing more than Newspeak for censorship. In reality, the goal has always been to silence minorities who already struggle to express themselves, while allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant. It is a form of indirect censorship, through the self-censorship of minorities who fear speaking out. Then comes direct censorship, where certain terms or lin…

Prior to Musk's purchase of Twitter, feminists who expressed the view that women and girls need single-sex spaces, and that males who identify as women aren't actually women and therefore shouldn't be allowed in these spaces, would be banned from the platform under the guise of "transphobia". They were literally being silenced for expressing their criticism of the ideology of gender identity and how it is being used…

This is a flat out falsehood - jk rowling was spewing anti trans hate from the position of “feminism” long before the purchase of twitter, she was never “censored” or anything close to it. This is revisionist bs, framed in a way to make your dear leader look like the hero, and not the incompetent anti free speech nitwit he actually is.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#348

Post by _heimdall »

alt227 wrote: post #196
xzjis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Freedom of speech" on Twitter is nothing more than Newspeak for censorship. In reality, the goal has always been to silence minorities who already struggle to express themselves, while allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant. It is a form of indirect censorship, through the self-censorship of minorities who fear speaking out. Then comes direct censorship, where certain terms or lin…

> allowing hate, racist, homophobic, and transphobic language to run rampant Are the people with these views not also entitled to free speech and equal rights to express themselves the same as everybody else?

This is the tricky line, isn't it?

Regardless of whether someone is entitled to free speech, is a private company bound to the constitutional protection?

My understanding has always been that its specifically the government that can't censor me, a private company or citizen can. The NY Times isn't required to write an article I submit to them for example, that's no different than Twitter deciding not to keep a post a write.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#349

Post by ismthetism »

decimalenough wrote: post #4

Remember the Arab Spring and how Twitter was hailed as a tool for the masses to fight against their oppressors? And remember how Elon bought Twitter, loudly proclaiming he was doing so to defend free speech? I'm mildly curious to see how X tries to justify this, but I suspect they've reached the stage where they don't even need to pretend to pay lip service to their notional values.

Nah I think the ship has sailed on lip service. He is/was all about defending the "right" kind of free speech, anyway.

They don't have to pretend anymore. The man saluted at an inauguration, I think all pretense has left the building.

Re: X users are unable to post “Signal.me” links

#350

Post by throwaway93140 »

unclebucknasty wrote: post #300
alt227 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> anti-Semites have a pretty loud and public voice in the "Western" world So do Jews. So are we seeing full free speech in action? Or is whats right decided by which side people agree with?

> So do Jews. So are we seeing full free speech in action? To be clear, you're comparing anti-semites (a racist "group") with Jews (an ethnic/religious group). One is defined by holding a targeted, hateful ideology. The other is a group of human beings, by birth/existence. I make no claim against you, but this framing represents the insidiously successful repackaging of hate as an "equal right", which racists have us…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN