51–60 of 1001 posts
Jack was, quite famously, half-assing his leadership of Twitter for years. There was no secret, it was constantly discussed here on HN: how Jack’s inability to lead can be described as an “amazing subplot” rather than an embarrassing stain on Jack is beyond me — I guess because Elon loves Jack, this has to be framed positively?
It's just so surprising to see Tucker Carlson's outrage machine consistently make rounds in HM comments. I guess he recovered from that Jon Stewart skewering just fine amongst the HN crowd?
Just a couple weeks ago I had a comment downvoted and flagged for saying what this confirms. The political bias in tech circles is unreal sometimes.
The political bias from either party is unreal most of the times. It isn't exclusive to the left or right.
I don't follow or give attention to American politics, I don't live in America, and probably never will. But the Left bias in Social media is extremely concerning, its so apparent from the type of people who work in tech, especially in Silicon valley, that they have a Leftist bias, whether the Left or the Right are correct doesn’t matter. The issue is Social media in our time is it’s where a lot of people form opinio…
Why should it have been a bigger story exactly? My understanding is there wasn't any wrongdoing found (not to mention the chain of custody was a mess).
(As I said I am not an avid american politics follower, I would remove the "should've been a bigger story" line if that's an issue)
I don't follow or give attention to American politics, I don't live in America, and probably never will. But the Left bias in Social media is extremely concerning, its so apparent from the type of people who work in tech, especially in Silicon valley, that they have a Leftist bias, whether the Left or the Right are correct doesn’t matter. The issue is Social media in our time is it’s where a lot of people form opinio…
Here’s the thing thought. So far the emails show a team making a mistake, and being thoughtful about it. Trying to look to their moderation principals and disagreeing about the path forward. Then, later we know Jack and Yoel and most of the team apologized and admitted it was a mistake. If these people were all conservatives and I saw this interaction I would say the same thing. So tell me a story about principals th…
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.
So I guess, yeah, what do you propose gets done about it? What is the core principal here that should get applied equally across the political spectrum. If you misapply your moderation policies you should be hanged?
Anyone have the 'long form' of this to read? Twitter is such a terrible way to read long content. Aside: I really enjoyed Taibbi's few books, but haven't respected his online opinions since around 2016. I'm not surprised Elon chose Taibbi to 'break this story' considering what 'side' Taibbi's been on -- he's had a pretty clear bias, but I'm willing to check out more of his reporting here in long form.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, this will almost certainly not hit the frontpage. The dupe detector has already started removing all the threads, even though on other topics it only engages after a topic actually gets picked up. Every effort will be taken to suppress this story, just like the story it's talking about. (And remember that dang has before admitted to manually editing scores and reordering the front page to suit his preferences for…
[removed]
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.
It's often actually written into their policies. There are certainly corporations that say the opposite, or require the board to be notified, or whatever, but it would not be that uncommon for the head of legal to respond to something and then inform the CEO after doing it.
As for suppressing stories - it seems they suppressed stories from pretty much anyone who asked - Matt says explicitly they did it for "both sides".
That does not seem like an abuse of power. It may be a crappy policy, but despite all the hand-wringing, Twitter is just a platform, not anything special. So maybe it's a platform with a crappy policy.
Believing that 7.8 billion people talking at each other directly (where if 99% of people agree, you are still arguing with 78 million people) is somehow advancing anything useful is, honestly, crazy or highly ignorant of why we moved towards representative systems of (government, et al) in the first place.
It wasn't because we couldn't get all the people in the room.
Seeing it as a place to shoot the shit, awesome.
Seeing it as a foundational block of democracy - uh, no. Or at least, if it ever became that, democracy is doomed. Thankfully, it isn't, really.