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

A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

fanbyte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–577 of 577 posts

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#571

Post by soraminazuki »

pvg wrote: post #548
Groxx wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the system went from "our system thinks this looks like revenge porn" to "we are sending you a warning in case you are, verify that you are not doing it or change your actions immediately. you may be banned on review if it appears you did" I think you might be right. But that's not happening. It goes from "our system thinks this looks like revenge porn" to "you are banned". And even "we double checked, you are ban…

The account was suspended and, again, the policy, which you should read, makes it pretty clear that you can be suspended for Twitter being wrong about your post. It takes a lot of implicit extrapolations ('revenge porn', a term they don't use, 'banned', a thing they don't actually do in those cases, etc) to get to 'accused of a crime'. And they aren't in the thing.

Using a synonym isn't an "implicit extrapolation."

> 'revenge porn', a term they don't use

Again, "non-consentual nudity" means revenge porn.

https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/intimate-medi...

> 'banned', a thing they don't actually do in those cases

They "suspended" the account and haven't reversed it. Basically the same thing.

Please, repeating a claim over and over doesn't make it any more true.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#572

Post by r0rshrk »

I get this on visiting the linked website. What?

> We've discontinued servicing users from your location and are thereby preventing access to any of the websites owned and operated by ZAM Network, LLC DBA Fanbyte (the owner of Fanbyte.com):

This decision is ultimately one we were forced to make due to the number of visitors from your region when compared to the operational costs necessary to continue providing access there. It was a tough decision but one that we ultimately had to accept. This is an indefinite decision. We genuinely apologize for the inconvenience this will cause all of those who reside within your region.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#573

Post by emn13 »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #561
emn13 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did this for years. I regret it. It's overly simplistic to think this works well. The devil is in the details; and being a decent human being also means adapting to other's wishes, needs and habits. Being a small-scale dictator about modes of communication isn't great. You _will_ miss out of valuable personal communication if you choose to go this route. It's not just about an online curated persona.

> Being a small-scale dictator about modes of communication isn't great. Oh come now, isn’t this a little dramatic? If I was forcing them to use one app I want in order to stay in touch you’d have a point, but isn’t that also functionally what you’re saying we should have to deal with? Meeting someone all the way, only on ONE mode of communication they demand? This also doesn’t address how niche this situation is. Th…

It's not just about family; it's about friends too, and perhaps the periphery of extended family. Losing contact is a price. Is it worth paying?

That'll vary from person to person, but my personal experience with this was that this was a mistake I now regret. I incidentally also avoided whatsapp and other facebook-owned apps, which certainly didn't help. And some people are probably naturally great at collecting other contact details and keeping in touch via phone and email; I'm not.

I stand behind the principle, mind you; I just think I should have placed day-to-day human beings I needlessly lost contact with above that principle. I still encourage contacts to avoid facebook, but that's it. But to each their own, for sure.

I'm simply saying this because in a forum such as this one that likes to focus on the abstract and principled it's easy to overlook the plain and quotidian daily existence we all have too; we shouldn't.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#574

Post by Nextgrid »

stiltzkin wrote: post #567
Nextgrid wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> membership nfts (bayc) I have a problem with this one - the membership is supposed to give you access to events/etc hosted by BAYC, so in this case they are the trusted party and can run a database. The blockchain doesn't seem like it adds anything here because ultimately BAYC can choose to deny entry for any reason. Furthermore, how do they handle the case where a membership NFT is stolen or acquired illegitimatel…

> I have a problem with this one - the membership is supposed to give you access to events/etc hosted by BAYC, so in this case they are the trusted party and can run a database. Ethereum blockchain is the database, BAYC can't delete, modify or censor any BAYC users. > Furthermore, how do they handle the case where a membership NFT is stolen or acquired illegitimately? Do they still honor the stolen NFT and let the th…

> Ethereum blockchain is the database, BAYC can't delete, modify or censor any BAYC users.

But why does it matter what the blockchain says? The bouncer hired by BAYC to stand at the door of their event can "bounce" you regardless. May as well save resources & complexity by having them run a DB since they can ignore what the blockchain says anyway.

> Getting a BAYC is as simple as transfering an NFT from one wallet to another, mint it with a wallet on BAYC website or buy it on a centralized or decentralized market place, anywhere in the world. There is no database with this type of frictionless.

Getting a brand new BAYC involves "minting it" on their website - no different than buying a ticket on Ticketmaster/etc, and I'd argue the Ticketmaster route is easier as you don't have to worry about safeguarding a wallet/installing Metamask/etc.

Getting a BAYC off someone else involves an Ethereum transaction with its associated fees - in practice those are usually mediated by a marketplace such as OpenSea so decentralization/etc goes away. There's no reason the BAYC website couldn't just manage those transfers directly and skip all of the complexity. There's a theoretical advantage where because it all happens on the blockchain you could transfer an NFT without any third-party involvement (depending on how the smart contract is set up, but I'm assuming good faith and no artificial restrictions preventing that) but how many people do this in practice?

Considering the true value of a BAYC is to get access to their exclusive events (I am ignoring the temporary speculation aspect which is is now on its way out), I still don't see what advantages the blockchain brings compared to them just running an old-school members' club with memberships in a DB, since in practice they can deny entry to the event to anyone regardless of what the blockchain says. If they want to make memberships transferrable they can trivially do so on their platform, since in practice most NFT transfers right now happen on a centralized marketplace anyway.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#575

Post by fuckstick »

lapcat wrote: post #533
fuckstick wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Clearly at least one person in this thread did not know it, so there's no harm in telling people about it. > Heh, no. I am the person who started this thread, and the only other person in this thread other than those defending unsolicited advice. Heh, yes. Ironic given the original topic was in part criticizing human mod decisions. And I never ever thought after decades on public Internet forums that unsolicited a…

> And I never ever thought after decades on public Internet forums that unsolicited advice was somehow disallowed or even generally frowned upon. Well, I'm glad that I've finally got you thinking about it now. It's important to recognize that many people do resent unsolicited advice, especially when it's obvious, condescending, and implies criticism of the person's choices, which is this case here. I talked about a t…

> Well, I'm glad that I've finally got you thinking about it now.

Wow, on being condescending, takes one to know one I guess.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#576

Post by dapids »

micimize wrote: post #467
dapids wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you arguing here? That twitter is good at moderation because we simply can't see it behind the scenes? I can think of hundred different ways this could have affected someone negatively, especially if they weren't able to speak with support in native language. So c'mon, there is no excuse for this ban to take place, and then continue to be banned after the first appeal, statistics or not.

My primary points are that 24h turn around to get the issue resolved is not bad, and that blaming the AI is silly when the human in the loop didn't fix anything. But yes, I am also saying we don't know the reality of what the content moderation team is dealing with, we basically only see the false positives. I'm not saying they're doing a good job (especially the team handling appeals), I'm saying that we should be m…

So, if you don't know the reality, why pretend or even give a shadow of a doubt of good faith? You've lost me man. They can do more to be transparent, but they don't. This is not a technological blocker, its a deliberate decision. Don't act like they can't show the reality of moderation, they simply choose not to. We already established in this scenario they chose to do nothing after manual review by a human. What more evidence of failure do you need. It's not working, period.

Re: A clip from Stray got me banned from Twitter

#577

Post by cgriswald »

lapcat wrote: post #479
cgriswald wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're being overly generous here. He doesn't offer examples of the harassment he reported. Even if he had, he's comparing Twitter AI-flagged revenge porn posts against user-reported harassment posts. The former is pretty clear cut and Twitter flagged it themselves. The latter may be a judgment call and was probably reported by the alleged target. His rudeness undercuts any such argument anyway, since we can'…

> Even if he had, he's comparing Twitter AI-flagged revenge porn posts against user-reported harassment posts. The former is pretty clear cut and Twitter flagged it themselves. The latter may be a judgment call and was probably reported by the alleged target. I would consider humans manually reporting tweets to be much more reliable than AI flagging, especially given the bizarre false positive results we've seen from…

> I would consider humans manually reporting tweets to be much more reliable than AI flagging, especially given the bizarre false positive results we've seen from Twitter AI flagging.

Sure. However, in this case Twitter is the one with the AI and the one deciding whether to trust a source. The case for child porn is virtually binary and even where it isn't, they're going to lean on the side of not allowing something. The case for harassment is reported by unknown humans who are probably personally involved, and whether something is or is not harassment is not always black and white. From Twitter's point of view, it probably makes more sense to trust their own AI.

Here, the author hasn't provided specific examples of alleged harassment, so readers can't even make a judgment call.

Post reply on HN