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

Twitter discloses national security letters

blog.twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 160 posts

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#71

Post by Neliquat »

orbitingpluto wrote: post #36
thedevil wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Might his lower Twitter engagement have something to do with people getting sick of hearing from him about Trump?" Do you really think the attention he gets on Twitter DROPPED because of him talking about Trump?

I've stopped reading Dilbert let alone Twitter. Seeing him post pictures of himself acting in the role of sugar daddy to a petulant child-woman is well beyond my initial scope of interest in him. My interest was Dilbert. It was all about making fun of the disconnect between management and employees. Ironically, his public persona is now at odds with the general theme of his work. I suspect his original material is ju…

So you reject the art because of the views of the artist? Have a fun time being able to enjoy anything.

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#72

Post by CaptSpify »

mulmen wrote: post #44
thedevil wrote: post #7

Is this the same Twitter that has allegedly shadowbanned Scott Adams multiple times for his political positions? If Twitter is interested in transparency, how about some transparency on that? Twitter's actions make me distrust any "transparency" talk, even if I disagree with Adams on certain things.

Twitter has no obligation to show anything anyone enters into their platform. They own it, they can do what they want with it. The government is subject to the rule of law and these NSLs can easily run afoul of the laws put in place to protect us from our government.

I know nothing of this case, nor do I care about SA. Additionally, I believe that all NSL's should be illegal, precisely for the reasons you specify above.

While twitter is not legally obligated to show anything, I am not legally obligated to like them. They are still open to criticism.

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#73

Post by sbierwagen »

sperglord wrote: post #58
Thlom wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why I almost never use the Twitter web site or their app. Too confusing. I stick with Tweetbot which still only shows the complete timeline in reversed chronological order.

I was not aware the app did that. I'm a little disappointed in the service to learn about this.

Go to Settings > Timeline and uncheck "Show me the best tweets first"

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#74

Post by sbierwagen »

phpnode wrote: post #31
teddyh wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would anyone actually prove something like this, short of getting Twitter to admit it? What he has seen is: > my tweets only go out to a subset of my followers. The rest don’t know I tweeted. My followers tell me this is the case. They have to visit my timeline to see my tweets. What other proof could anyone realistically provide?

That is how twitter works - it doesn't show every tweet from everyone you follow in your timeline, it shows a subset based on what it considers most relevant.

Only if you have "Show me the best tweets first" enabled. (It's on by default)

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#75

Post by WillyOnWheels »

ng12 wrote: post #9
thedevil wrote: post #7

Is this the same Twitter that has allegedly shadowbanned Scott Adams multiple times for his political positions? If Twitter is interested in transparency, how about some transparency on that? Twitter's actions make me distrust any "transparency" talk, even if I disagree with Adams on certain things.

It's just virtue signaling, something Jack is very big on.

Virtue signaling is a meaningless phrase.

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#76

Post by WillyOnWheels »

thedevil wrote: post #7

Is this the same Twitter that has allegedly shadowbanned Scott Adams multiple times for his political positions? If Twitter is interested in transparency, how about some transparency on that? Twitter's actions make me distrust any "transparency" talk, even if I disagree with Adams on certain things.

Twitter doesn't shadowban, multiple current and ex Twitter employees can confirm for you.

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#77

Post by orbitingpluto »

Neliquat wrote: post #71
orbitingpluto wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've stopped reading Dilbert let alone Twitter. Seeing him post pictures of himself acting in the role of sugar daddy to a petulant child-woman is well beyond my initial scope of interest in him. My interest was Dilbert. It was all about making fun of the disconnect between management and employees. Ironically, his public persona is now at odds with the general theme of his work. I suspect his original material is ju…

So you reject the art because of the views of the artist? Have a fun time being able to enjoy anything.

If you go to dilbert.com the cartoon comes part and parcel with his blog. This dissuades me from visiting the site.

I like Wagner too. But if I had to read an anti-Semitic pamphlet every time I listened to him, I wouldn't put him in my playlist.

I think that's reasonable, no?

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#78

Post by kyledrake »

Neliquat wrote: post #71
orbitingpluto wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've stopped reading Dilbert let alone Twitter. Seeing him post pictures of himself acting in the role of sugar daddy to a petulant child-woman is well beyond my initial scope of interest in him. My interest was Dilbert. It was all about making fun of the disconnect between management and employees. Ironically, his public persona is now at odds with the general theme of his work. I suspect his original material is ju…

So you reject the art because of the views of the artist? Have a fun time being able to enjoy anything.

I will admit, only listening to GG Allin all day has been getting a little stale.

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#79

Post by throwaway91111 »

BinaryIdiot wrote: post #65
moxious wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I may be in the minority, but I still think these companies are being cowardly. They disclose as soon as they're permitted to, but the trouble with that is that the permission is coming from the people who are the problem in the first place. An approach that would care about customers and show some more guts would be simple refusal. In essence, civil disobedience in the face of someone who is violating the law. Let t…

> I may be in the minority, but I still think these companies are being cowardly. I don't know. Seems really easy to say when it's not you on the receiving end. But I mostly agree about your other points I just have a hard time judging them too harshly for not wanting to risk their business and / or personal freedoms.

What is "just harsh enough" for you?

Re: Twitter discloses national security letters

#80

Post by hellbanner »

thedevil wrote: post #7

Is this the same Twitter that has allegedly shadowbanned Scott Adams multiple times for his political positions? If Twitter is interested in transparency, how about some transparency on that? Twitter's actions make me distrust any "transparency" talk, even if I disagree with Adams on certain things.

Twitter let Arab Spring happen. Think about that.. what was their political motivation?
Post reply on HN