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

The Twitter Files

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#351

Post by assttoasstmgr »

myko wrote: post #309
assttoasstmgr wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people talking about ToS as if it's applied consistently and without bias. Let's assume that the oft-storied "pee tapes" were real, published by a mainstream news outlet and posted to Twitter. Would those same individuals regurgitating ToS violations agree that should receive the same treatment, or would they have been complicit in spreading it as far and wide as possible?

I think there is a big difference between the sitting POTUS who was known to ask for and receive Russia's help getting elected being shown to have kompromat on him vs the unelected son of a presidential candidate's hacked iCloud nudes being posted Especially given that in the "pee tapes" trump is clothed while the women are nude and unknown individuals

It's a bit naïve to seriously think this story has anything to do with nudes. The real story was about corruption at the highest levels of government, selling influence, etc. The crack rocks and related pornographic content were a convenient if not shocking distraction. Embarassing? Yes. Scandalous? Sure. But it wasn't what made it news worthy at all.

Re: The Twitter Files

#353

Post by newZWhoDis »

afavour wrote: post #301
lapcat wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So in America you cannot say negative things about political leaders online?!?! I looked at the tweets mentioned by Taibbi in the Wayback Machine, and they didn't actually appear to be unflattering speech or even speech at all but rather photos. The first tweet, for example, was some explicit photos (which I assume would violate Twitter's rules whether or not they were of Hunter Biden).

I believe all three are pornographic in nature. So while it’s still notable that the Biden team reached out manually to report them it does seem all the tweets were in violation of Twitter policy and fair game for removal.

No post body was provided.

Re: The Twitter Files

#354

Post by StanislavPetrov »

dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

>Maybe twitter's policies were bad, and applied inconsistently.

Clearly they were.

>But there is no clear evidence that they explicitly favored one party

The evidence is not only clear, but overwhelming. But more than favoring a party, they favored the DC blob narrative. See the treatment of Wikileaks vs the treatment of CIA propaganda accounts like PropOrNot or Bellingcat as crystal clear examples.

>I don't really care if they do. If Elon thinks this is some sort of big shock that will cause people to get excited.... I can't really see why.

This is really the problem and the issue at hand. Many whose perceived political opponents are being silenced and attacked by the unholy cabal of government and big tech don't care (or worse, are happy) because they have no principles. At the end of the day, those they look down upon, or that they think are bad for whatever reason, are getting the shaft, and that is just fine with them. Those of us with principles think that everyone deserves to be treated by the same set of rules, even those people we don't like or who we think are bad. Unfortunately, the schism between the principled and unprincipled is only growing wider as the former group shrinks and the latter group grows daily.

Re: The Twitter Files

#355

Post by etchalon »

sn0w_crash wrote: post #50
mikkergp wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Abuse of power by whom? Twitter or the Government?

The head of legal at of a publicly traded corporation acting without knowledge of the CEO to suppress a story about a presidential candidates son, while other internal executives argue in writing if they even have the legal/policy grounds to do so - Ive spent decades in corporations and I can think of few more obvious abuses of power. If you can see the scam, great. If you cannot then I cannot help you.

This is not an abuse of power. It's literally what the job entails.

This is why companies have leadership, with diversified duties. So the CEO doesn't have to have knowledge.

You can absolutely, and fairly, argue that is the wrong call, that the team acted too swiftly, but it's weird to look at what has been reported so far and say it was "abuse of power".

Re: The Twitter Files

#357

Post by AmericanOP »

darth_avocado wrote: post #272
Dem_Boys wrote: post #127

Most concerning thing here is that this proves political parties (including the white house[0]) have a direct line to Twitter[1] to get stuff they dislike removed. One would have to assume that there was also a direct line to other social medial platforms. It's so wild to have the slimy-ness of our American political system be revealed in yet another way. So in America you cannot say negative things about political l…

Are we going to pretend the same lines don’t exist to old school television channels, newspapers and radio stations?

Apparently only quantum physics can determine if twitter violates the first amendment relative to the observer.

A nobel prize awaits discovery of the scale equation for when the law begins to exert force, theorizing anti-hypocrisy particles.

Re: The Twitter Files

#358

Post by dehrmann »

dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

> your work emails

You mean emails the company paid you to write for its benefit? They were never yours. Also, there's the adage about never emailing any statement you wouldn't want on the front page of the NYT for this exact reason.

Re: The Twitter Files

#359

Post by 1270018080 »

jmyeet wrote: post #263
Dig1t wrote: post #16

I'm a moderate, not a Democrat and not a Republican. I think people on the left have a blind spot here, that the more suppression they use, the more division they create, and the more moderates and people on the right grow to resent them. I would have identified as a Democrat on pretty much every issue, but this authoritarian suppression of speech and ideas has just pushed me away from that side completely. At this p…

> I'm a moderate The Overton window in the US stems from center-right (Democrats) to extreme-right (Republicans) so if you're in the middle of that you're firmly a conservative. Don't believe me? Example: we've got the ongoing threat of a strike tby rail workers who want paid sick leave . They currently have no paid sick leave. Calling in sick will come off their vacation days. It may even get them disciplined and fi…

You're comment is a little greyed out which means people are downvoting it. The core aspect being that democrats are center right and republicans are extreme right. The both-sides enlightened centrists can't accept this. The do-nothingness tenant of being in the middle regardless of ideology simply shatters.

Re: The Twitter Files

#360

Post by idlewords »

prescriptivist wrote: post #258
idlewords wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment illustrates why it's a good idea to prune these kinds of stories from the homepage. No one learns anything new or surprising from discussing this stuff here, at this point we could have the same political nerdfight in our sleep.

Do you actually care about what happens on this website or is this just a good chance for you to emerge randomly and make some arch point about how stupid everyone is for falling for this garbage?

I don't have a particular attachment to this website, but I admire 'dang for doing the hard work of moderating it, and for doing so in an honest and transparent way for a very long time now. So it bugs me to see people disparage that work by insinuating darker motives.
Post reply on HN