Now its been published... I feel evel less like giving a shit about twitter.
its a dud platform. tbh, ALL of the Social Media platforms are dud to me.
The Twitter Files
531–540 of 1001 posts
Re: The Twitter Files
#532Most 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…
I'm scratching my head here. It's quite a leap to go from: > political parties... have a direct line to Twitter to get stuff they dislike removed ...to: > in America you cannot say negative things about political leaders online Twitter is not the internet. It's a tiny part of the internet. You can say whatever you want on many, many platforms. In fact, people can't stop talking about some of this stuff on HN and Redd…
Also you can say negative things about political leaders on Twitter. This is easily verifiable by glancing at Twitter for a few seconds.
Re: The Twitter Files
#533Most 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…
I'm scratching my head here. It's quite a leap to go from: > political parties... have a direct line to Twitter to get stuff they dislike removed ...to: > in America you cannot say negative things about political leaders online Twitter is not the internet. It's a tiny part of the internet. You can say whatever you want on many, many platforms. In fact, people can't stop talking about some of this stuff on HN and Redd…
Does anyone really believe that the government and the political parties don’t have direct lines to Twitter, FB, Google, CNN, FoxNews etc etc?
Re: The Twitter Files
#534Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you read your own source? The Biden team never asked Twitter staff to “handle” anything. They forwarded tweets that [violated twitter’s ToS][1], a Twitter staff member forwarded them for review, and at that point the reviewer said they “handled these.” That’s what content moderation is supposed to do! [1]: https://twitter.com/parkebench/status/1598841731763810304
Quoted post unavailable.
Biden wasn’t in the White House in 2020?
Campaign staff reporting tweets that made him look bad seems… fairly pedestrian?
There’s far more egregious examples of bad behavior out there than this.
Re: The Twitter Files
#535It does not seem like this really exposed any new information - Twitter publicly justified its actions as being about its hacked data policy back when this all happened ( https://www.nationalreview.com/news/twitter-cites-hacked-mat... ). All this shows is some internal disagreement as to whether that was the right call. By the way, Facebook also suppressed the news story citing its misinformation policy ( https://www…
Quoted post unavailable.
> We now have documented proof Twitter employees conspired with rogue elements of the United States government
im sorry? rogue elements? conspired?
what is even happening in this comment section?
Re: The Twitter Files
#536https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/elon-mus... It seems like this is basically coming from Elon Musk through someone he chose. What you’re about to read is the first installment in a series, based upon thousands of internal documents obtained by sources at Twitter Is Elon Musk now "sources at Twitter"? There might be some interesting bits in here, but I think it's important to note that this is Musk…
> Is Elon Musk now "sources at Twitter"?
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1598864377750306816
Probably.
Re: The Twitter Files
#537Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't matter which side, because isn't the problem that the government is doing an end run around the 1st Amendment? If you don't think so now, you might in 2024. So it's time to care now.
> Isn't the problem that the government is doing an end run around the 1st Amendment? "The Biden team" was not the government in October 2020. (For that matter there is a "Biden team" right now that has no governmental capacity, that is, his re-election team, which is probably engaged in these same kind of activities with many platforms.) I have to wonder if these communications aren't just pretty normal? It might be…
[deleted]
Re: The Twitter Files
#538I'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 find these kinds of comments hard to respond to. I want to respond in a way that's constructive, but it's hard. It's hard because many Republicans are pushing the US in a direction that will harm millions of Americans in very significant ways. Tucker Carlson and Libs of TikTok all but encourage violence against LGBT people. Republicans are trying to prevent Black people from voting. Many Republicans tried to overtu…
> constructive ways the Democrats could be better
Reorient the gun control efforts around the statistical realities of how guns are actually killing the most people. Throwing away all their political capital on banning semiautomatic rifles, in a ‘maximum success’ outcome, would prevent something like 2% of all firearm related deaths. I did some napkin math a couple months ago and children are more likely to die of leukemia than in a school shooting. No doubt school shootings indicate a moral failure in our society, but if you wanna budget out your political capital to do the most good, that’s not the place to look.
Drop the attacks on 2A and watch how much wind you take out of Republican sails. Dems love talking about how racist the Republicans are, but stick an AR15 in a Black woman’s hands for a photo op and boom she’s elected. Have someone run on a slogan “tax the rich and don’t take my fucking guns”. See what happens.
Disclosure: I don’t own guns, have never owned guns, and don’t really expect to.
Re: The Twitter Files
#539Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not just that, but revenge porn is literally illegal in the state of California, where Twitter is HQ'd. I'm getting increasingly annoyed by people pointing to those removed tweets as a smoking gun while being completely unaware that we know the contents of said tweet and said tweets can easily be interpreted as violating Twitter's ToS at minimum and actively violating California law at worst.
The case in point was the removal and censorship of the NY Post's story on the laptop, which was incredibly relevant to the Presidential election. It revealed Hunter as a degenerate crackhead, and an unqualified man-child who benefited directly from his father's position as Vice President to get a powerful, paid position on the Burisma Board of Directors, a favor for which he committed "10% to the big guy" (among oth…
All that has been shown is that Hunter was a POS trying to profit from his relationship with his father, who has been investigated and exonerated by the GOP: https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/senate-homeland-secur...
Just because they want to offer up 10% to the big guy doesn't mean he took it.
If he was guilty he should have been prosecuted (and would have been). Would you be willing to say the same about Trump?
Re: The Twitter Files
#540Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about neither have a direct line? Trying to say censorship is fine as long as the current party in power also gets it like the last guy isn’t a persuasive argument. You can’t abuse power you don’t have. We stopped letting monarchs control things via backroom dealings with their elite friends back in the 1700s for a good reason. Creating a system with zero transparency that’s at the whims of whoever currently has…
Backchannels can be used for good. Both parties had back channels (simultaneously), so it's not like the availability for a back channel was restricted to the party in power. And so long as we are talking "requests" and not "demands", there is no issue. The lack of transparency is an issue though, which was kinda my point... informal systems don't have transparency. But backchannels can certainly be helpful. Twitter…
Sure…backchannels can be good? But channels to do what?
Google fixing broken things in the products? Sure I guess that’s good absent alternatives.
A whale type customer getting a backchanel to the CEO is also good for business.
Twitter using backchannels to censor what the influential parties want? I don’t see who that is valuable to. It doesn’t help Twitters business and I doubt it’s how the public expects their speech to be censored. So only really their friends at Twitter benefit? Or anoint themselves gatekeeper and public benefactor.
Idk why you keep bringing up “both sides do it” as some excuse. Of course both sides have power/influence over big tech employees. Even unelected ones. It is entirely natural for established institutions and powerful individuals to have influence.
That’s why you should build in protections and processes to prevent that from happening. And if you do end up doing it then be transparent… have a public list of times you censored tweets at the request of public servants and powerful individuals.
It’s for the public’s good right? It’s not just about their own personal gain…right?