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

Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 311 posts

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#51

Post by slg »

blhack wrote: post #33

I'm finding the response people are having to this mail in voting thing to be...puzzling. It's not a ridiculous thing to wonder about how susceptible mail in voting is to fraud, and it seems like some of us are putting blinders on simply due to our distaste for the current president. If we were to hold a hackathon with a $100,000 prize for the most plausible path to exploit mail in voting in order to swing an electio…

The issue is that mail in voter fraud doesn't scale and you need scale to turn a national election. So you can argue this is a concern in general, but someone arguing this is a real problem for the integrity of the 2020 presidential election is being disingenuous at best.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#53

Post by henriquez »

jolux wrote: post #32
godelski wrote: post #24

I think one of the issues with this will be how it is linking the correct information. I like the little inclusion before tweets, but there's no sources on them. Then when you scroll down on the tweets I see them in this order: The Hill, WaPo, CNN, a CBS News reporter, a Fortune Magazine reporter, a Vox reporter, Sr Political Reporter for Huffington, ACLU Nebraska, a CNN political correspondent. The issue here is tha…

In what sense are CBS, CNN, and the Washington Post hard left?

I think it’s more fair to characterize them as corporatist and neoconservative/neoliberal. If the mainstream media were actually left-wing they would be propagandizing for Bernie Sanders. Instead they’re propagandizing in favor of old-guard politicians like Mitt Romney and Nancy Pelosi. But no matter how you slice it, it’s still propaganda.

I agree with the parent commenter that this will only backfire, likely causing the opposite of intended effect on undecided voters. Tech companies like Twitter are not in a position to play arbiters on what is factual and what isn’t. And I think it’s really dangerous both for people to expect tech companies to assume this mantle and also to expect them to do a good (or honest) job of it.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#54

Post by iateanapple »

acbart wrote: post #18
gkoberger wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand this route. The President of the United States already has a gigantic platform, so it's not like he'll just go away like @nero did. This gives Twitter a chance to annotate his hate with facts, and hopefully reach his audience. Banning him just makes him a martyr, without lessening his reach. I do wish the UI was a bit... angrier. The friendly light blue doesn't exactly scream "misinformation!" But as the…

I disagree, giving certain folks a platform only raises them up and legitimatizes them. Didn't the Reddit folks discover that shutting down hateful subreddits prevents them from popping back up effectively? I believe this is the citation[1]. [1] http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf

> I disagree, giving certain folks a platform only raises them up and legitimatizes them

Despite huge deplatforming efforts over the last decade fringe views have grown to become mainstream and there is less trust between people than ever.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#55

Post by pedroma »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #28

Trump is currently tweeting about how this warning message is taking away his 1st amendment rights to free speech, and constitutes interference in the 2020 election. Can't wait for these tweets to get the same warning. [1]: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/12654275381401886...

I should probably sell my Twitter shares soon.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#56

Post by tylerhou »

blhack wrote: post #33

I'm finding the response people are having to this mail in voting thing to be...puzzling. It's not a ridiculous thing to wonder about how susceptible mail in voting is to fraud, and it seems like some of us are putting blinders on simply due to our distaste for the current president. If we were to hold a hackathon with a $100,000 prize for the most plausible path to exploit mail in voting in order to swing an electio…

I think it's reasonable to wonder if mail-in ballots are susceptible to fraud, but there is not a lot of evidence that such fraud is widespread. In particular, Trump's tweet is completely off base with what election experts already know about voter fraud.

> Now we're expecting that states will radically alter their voting system, in 5 months, and that it won't be vulnerable to interference?

Are mail in ballots for everyone really a "radical alteration" of their voting system? Local governments already have the capacity to send and receive thousands of pieces of mail, and the method of counting ballots is the exact same.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#57

Post by notyourday »

archgoon wrote: post #47
blhack wrote: post #33

I'm finding the response people are having to this mail in voting thing to be...puzzling. It's not a ridiculous thing to wonder about how susceptible mail in voting is to fraud, and it seems like some of us are putting blinders on simply due to our distaste for the current president. If we were to hold a hackathon with a $100,000 prize for the most plausible path to exploit mail in voting in order to swing an electio…

I live in Washington State. I mailed my vote in for the 2016 election; doing this is not unprecedented. Why aren't all the expat ballots not faked?

There are lot of interesting rules about such ballots. For example, some states do not count them at all unless the margin of victory is less than the number of eligible or returned absentee ballots.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#58

Post by zests »

baddox wrote: post #27
runawaybottle wrote: post #17

If Covid second wave happens in November, large scale mail in ballot efforts could lead to the biggest voter turn out in American history.

And if that happens, take note of which political parties/groups fight tooth and nail because they know that voter turn out is bad for them. (It's not difficult to predict.)

Political posts aren’t pleasant for anyone. They are also often meaningless.

Watch as I essentially take the contrapositive of your statement and say >

See? Not pleasant. I’d wager a lot of people have problems with that statement and I’d also wager that I could use each of their counter arguments to my statements as counter arguments to yours.

I see this pattern a lot. Its strange to me.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#59

Post by groby_b »

colinmorelli wrote: post #19
austincheney wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did Dorsey clarify what he meant by public interests? That sounds like a vague distraction.

I think "preserving the words of the president" probably fits pretty squarely in the realm of public interest, even if they're blatantly false.

Not really, no. That's the WH's obligation, not Twitter's.

Jack Dorsey's public interest is increasing engagement and making money. That's it.

Re: Twitter tags Trump tweet with fact-checking warning

#60

Post by bosswipe »

blhack wrote: post #33

I'm finding the response people are having to this mail in voting thing to be...puzzling. It's not a ridiculous thing to wonder about how susceptible mail in voting is to fraud, and it seems like some of us are putting blinders on simply due to our distaste for the current president. If we were to hold a hackathon with a $100,000 prize for the most plausible path to exploit mail in voting in order to swing an electio…

I could accept that argument if it were being made in good faith, maybe there is some real evidence that mail in voting is more susceptible to fraud. But the argument is not being made in good faith, the argument is part of a long on-going coordinated effort across Republican governments at all levels to limit the people's right to vote.
Post reply on HN