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

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#421

Post by d23 »

roenxi wrote: post #262
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?

The situation is clouded by the extreme bias of the employees at Twitter. They seemed to believe they were applying the ToS consistently and fairly despite mountains of evidence to the contrary. It was interesting when they banned Trump that they cited "To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th." as a notable incitement of violence. Someone who can put that up and think o…

Trump attempted to use Twitter to overthrow the government and have the vice president of the United States executed by a mob.

Re: The Twitter Files

#422

Post by tptacek »

sva_ wrote: post #178
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.

> No one learns anything new or surprising from discussing this stuff here It was surprising to me to see that the various political parties are in direct contact with people at Twitter to remove stuff, and I consider myself fairly well informed.

Everybody reports everything to everybody. If that surprises you, reconsider how well informed you are. "Competitors work refs; film at 11."

Re: The Twitter Files

#423

Post by patmcc »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #367
Dem_Boys wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest Question: If the white house contacts Twitter and asks for a tweet to be removed, is that a first amendment violation?

Yes. And a properly-endowed Justice Department would begin prosecution for Twitter employees that colluded with the government to defraud US citizens of their fundamental rights. Twitter officers conspired with rogue elements of the US government to defraud US citizens of their constitutionally protected rights. This is not a game. The people involved should be facing 30 year prison sentences.

>>The people involved should be facing 30 year prison sentences.

For what crime, specifically?

Re: The Twitter Files

#424

Post by afavour »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #353
afavour wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Quoted post unavailable.

> Censoring skittle dick (a descriptive term, not a slur) 20 days out from an election was a crime.

Nudity was posted non-consensually, which is a crime in California. It was removed. That is not a crime.

Re: The Twitter Files

#425

Post by bakugo »

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…

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

"There's no REAL proof that large corporations overwhelmingly favor the left" is the political version of "there's no REAL proof that the earth is round"

Re: The Twitter Files

#426

Post by bitsnbytes »

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…

"One would have to assume that there was also a direct line to other social medial platforms. "

I would say its not a huge leap to think that.

I would even say its more than just other social media platforms. I would say it goes into main stream media on BOTH sides, Hollywood, sports, etc including global corporations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksb3KD6DfSI&ab_channel=Shoot...

Re: The Twitter Files

#427

Post by akira2501 »

Dem_Boys wrote: post #169
noah_buddy wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s blowing my mind to see people on Twitter reading the story and thinking this is an issue of whether or not Hunter Biden is a problem. This is clearly the much more pernicious issue that 1. social media companies are massively influencing the dissemination of information on an ad hoc basis informed by personal political whims and 2. even the leaders of these organizations are unable to rein in these influences.

Honest Question: If the white house contacts Twitter and asks for a tweet to be removed, is that a first amendment violation?

I think it should also mean that if Twitter was able to successfully do this, they no longer require any protections from Section 230. They're in full editorial control of the property, they shouldn't enjoy any further legal shields while simultaneously enjoying this apparent total oversight.

Re: The Twitter Files

#428

Post by lapcat »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #389
lapcat wrote: post #189

The worst part of this censorship was the pure stupidity of trying to censor links to a website that was always available independently of Twitter and Facebook. If someone wanted to read the story, they could always go to the original source, the NY Post. It's just impossible to keep it a secret, and that's why the censorship attempt was an utter failure, predictably so. Failure was inevitable in this case. Twitter c…

> It's just impossible to keep it a secret, and that's why the censorship attempt was an utter failure Context matters. They didn’t fail to hide the story, that wasn’t the goal. They succeeded in their goal of preventing the story from harming their candidate a few days before the election. This is everything the left says they care about, a mega corp colluding with powerful connected political interests to determine…

> They succeeded in their goal of preventing the story from harming their candidate a few days before the election.

Did they? Of course Joe Biden was elected, but there's no evidence that this was the cause. I said "I haven't heard a good argument of why Hunter Biden should have been a crucial factor in deciding how to vote in 2020, when there were a ton of other vastly more important issues." And I still haven't heard one.

In any case, the censorship seems to have backfired somewhat and raised the profile of the story. People won't shut up about it even now, two years later.

Re: The Twitter Files

#429

Post by mc32 »

ryanbrunner wrote: post #179
Dem_Boys wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest Question: If the white house contacts Twitter and asks for a tweet to be removed, is that a first amendment violation?

If we take the most innocent sounding version of this, where the White House points out that a tweet is in violation of Twitter's stated policies and asks for those policies to be applied, I think it's pretty clearly not. Of course those requests can and will be made in a biased manner, and it's naive to assume that the nature of the request isn't going to influence how Twitter responds to it, but it's definitely a m…

Couple of things:

government used to be weary of any appearance of impropriety, lest people believe they are acting improperly -being slimy. That seems to have gone by the wayside.

two, if the requests were to suppress sensitive government information --secrets, ok, I might lend a sympathetic ear, if they could prove it was so (not because they said "take our word". But this is "don't make us look bad" --sorry, but no, it stays.

And now we are hearing the gov wants to amp up domestic surveillance. The ACLU and EFF, etc should get off their butts and perform their claimed duty. We're not China in that sense yet, but if we let them, we'll get there.

Re: The Twitter Files

#430

Post by dd36 »

newZWhoDis wrote: post #353
afavour wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Quoted post unavailable.

So if Fox News doesn’t cover Jared Kushner’s antics to your satisfaction, should all Fox News executives go to jail?
Post reply on HN