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

Twitter doesn't care about spam?

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 192 posts

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#51

Post by holler »

riffic wrote: post #23

Twitter's a company with such a strange relationship with the users of its own site. I modded /r/Twitter on reddit for a year but burned myself out (I chose to de-moderate FYI) simply because Twitter doesn't care about its community or even recognizing the existence of the community that developed around trying to provide the support the company won't provide on its own. Perhaps my take is cynical, but I really do li…

> Twitter doesn't care about its community or even recognizing the existence of the community that developed around trying to provide the support the company won't provide on its own.

It's fascinating that such a community would even need to develop, but maybe it's because of the difference in mediums?

I'm working on an alternative and would love to chat if there's a way to connect!

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#52

Post by DisjointedHunt »

CyberRabbi wrote: post #49

If you feel the need to complain about the quality of Twitter posts you use Twitter too much. Get a more interesting hobby for your own sake

>“If you feel the need to complain about ”

This should never ever translate to “you use it too much”. I mean, speak to the quality of the substance in the argument and not throw out the right to voice an opinion about something that seems broken.

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#53

Post by riffic »

DisjointedHunt wrote: post #47

Anytime I see the comments on posts about social media moderation, I laugh my ass off. People calling it a “hard” problem simply parrot the narrative they see other engineers who have tackled it in leadership positions adopt. The reality is it’s a “Dirty” problem. The equivalent of a sewer cleaner in the old days that is a thankless, low pay, low career prospect, riddled-with-politics , nightmare. Look up the salary…

Masnick's Impossibility Theorem is a fun one to quote in these types of threads.

Content moderation at scale is impossible to do well. There's never going to be perfection here. It's over.

Your points are also 100% valid and on-the-nose.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191111/23032743367/masni...

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#54

Post by winternett »

jsnell wrote: post #9

Option d: nobody outside of the Twitter TnS teams (including Paul Graham) has any idea of what Twitter is detecting as spam and what not, and thus can't actually judge how good a job is being done. First, we don't see the spam that was outright blocked, so we have no idea of what the false negative rate is. Second, I bet that this is not a binary block/allow decision, but there are all kinds of ways of reducing the e…

The experience is based on who you follow. Twitter builds a list of topics based on your activity and it never gets edited, so even if you unfollow someone, that list still influences everything you see.

Algorithm development has been poor and really frustrating to users because if they even come across someone who followed the Kardashians (for example), they literally get spammed with that news for the life of their accounts, and Twitter's "mutewords" functionality has also not worked for many years, I can't tell if that is intentionally so or not.

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#55

Post by nfriedly »

I mostly treat twitter as a write-only medium: if I want to share something with the world, I might write a tweet about it.

There are a few exceptions - e.g. if there's a specific thing I want to know about, like "is service XYZ experiencing an outage?", I might check twitter. And, sure, if someone sends me DM or a link to a tweet, I'll go read it. But that's about it.

I used to pay closer attention to the notifications, but then they started filling it with random tweets that I don't care about, so now I mostly ignore that too.

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#56

Post by riffic »

holler wrote: post #51
riffic wrote: post #23

Twitter's a company with such a strange relationship with the users of its own site. I modded /r/Twitter on reddit for a year but burned myself out (I chose to de-moderate FYI) simply because Twitter doesn't care about its community or even recognizing the existence of the community that developed around trying to provide the support the company won't provide on its own. Perhaps my take is cynical, but I really do li…

> Twitter doesn't care about its community or even recognizing the existence of the community that developed around trying to provide the support the company won't provide on its own. It's fascinating that such a community would even need to develop, but maybe it's because of the difference in mediums? I'm working on an alternative and would love to chat if there's a way to connect!

> a way to connect

same username on Twitter, Reddit, and @gmail

I'm not sure if any of my insights are to be valued though. I'm just a cynical troll who thinks everything is terrible here. I'd suggest seeking out advice from people who aren't extremely online.

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#57

Post by stevage »

winternett wrote: post #54
jsnell wrote: post #9

Option d: nobody outside of the Twitter TnS teams (including Paul Graham) has any idea of what Twitter is detecting as spam and what not, and thus can't actually judge how good a job is being done. First, we don't see the spam that was outright blocked, so we have no idea of what the false negative rate is. Second, I bet that this is not a binary block/allow decision, but there are all kinds of ways of reducing the e…

The experience is based on who you follow. Twitter builds a list of topics based on your activity and it never gets edited, so even if you unfollow someone, that list still influences everything you see. Algorithm development has been poor and really frustrating to users because if they even come across someone who followed the Kardashians (for example), they literally get spammed with that news for the life of their…

Eh? Muting words works just fine ?

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#59

Post by stevage »

ryanSrich wrote: post #31
jsnell wrote: post #9

Option d: nobody outside of the Twitter TnS teams (including Paul Graham) has any idea of what Twitter is detecting as spam and what not, and thus can't actually judge how good a job is being done. First, we don't see the spam that was outright blocked, so we have no idea of what the false negative rate is. Second, I bet that this is not a binary block/allow decision, but there are all kinds of ways of reducing the e…

Crazy how we can have such different experiences. I follow less than 100 accounts and easily 50% of the responses are always spam/scams. It makes Twitter almost unusable for me. The most ironic part is that Twitter will show the spam/scams, but hide other replies, from real people, that Twitter thinks are mean.

I follow around 1000. I see almost zero spam. This whole thread is pretty confusing to me.

Re: Twitter doesn't care about spam?

#60

Post by pmarreck »

jsnell wrote: post #9

Option d: nobody outside of the Twitter TnS teams (including Paul Graham) has any idea of what Twitter is detecting as spam and what not, and thus can't actually judge how good a job is being done. First, we don't see the spam that was outright blocked, so we have no idea of what the false negative rate is. Second, I bet that this is not a binary block/allow decision, but there are all kinds of ways of reducing the e…

> First, we don't see the spam that was outright blocked, so we have no idea of what the false negative rate is

Yep. Perfect example of the Survivorship Fallacy/Bias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

Post reply on HN