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

The Twitter Files

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#761

Post by jacquesm »

RonaldRaygun wrote: post #585
freejazz wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taibbi doesn't even say any of that

But that's going to be the narrative. The actual reality doesn't matter, just like the endless gloating these days about the so-called "Russia hoax" - where there was a bunch of shady goings-on between the Trump campaign and the RU gov't who was quite explicit in their desire to work with and assist his campaign. But because it didn't achieve the nigh-impossible feat of a successful impeachment vote by his own party,…

This started with the 'Swift Boat Veterans for Truth' and it hasn't stopped since because it wasn't smacked down hard. Smear campaigns work, the question is if you let them or not and the US seems to firmly believe that smear campaigns (and lots of money) are legal means of achieving political dominance.

Re: The Twitter Files

#762

Post by guntherhermann »

somenameforme wrote: post #543
anonu wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A two party system works. I'm from a country with a 20+ party system and it's dysfunctional. In addition, you can't lump Democrats or Republicans in the USA in their respective boats. There's a hundred shades of grey within each party. But rallying behind one candidate versus a hundred in a primary makes for a better setup than anything else I've seen in other countries.

I don't really agree with you but you shouldn't be grayed out. The idea of a dysfunctional government sounds bad, but ironically that is precisely what the Founding Fathers endeavored to create. And it sounds absurd for all the reasons you're certainly aware of. Yet is the opposite desirable? In modern US politics, parties have become capable of enacting pretty substantial change on very narrow margins. This can be g…

> I don't really agree with you but you shouldn't be grayed out.

Yes, but herein lies the issue with any "downvote" mechanic. How it should be used compared to how it actually used is quite different.

The discussion on HN in general does not follow the guidelines https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

> Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. Edit out swipes.

> Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. That tramples curiosity.

> Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that".

And on and on, the amount of comments in this thread alone that don't stick to the guidelines is too high, but I think the moderation team is very small (just dang?)

Re: The Twitter Files

#763

Post by runsWphotons »

romellem wrote: post #296
Dig1t wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064 Biden team asking Twitter to "handle" tweets they don't like. This rubs me the wrong way, nobody in government should be telling Twitter to remove speech.

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

throughout the replies here people are making this argument but it still seems insane to me. like if you got photographed with prostitutes and someone tweeted that out would you expect the DNC to lobby directly w Twitter to get those down or would you just report the tweets in the app

Re: The Twitter Files

#764

Post by wyclif »

brtkdotse wrote: post #738
noduerme wrote: post #695

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what's super fun now is watching one mod try to run twitter without any written policies whatsoever.

Imagine paying 44 billion buckaroos to become a mod.

Pretty bad take. He paid 44 million to own the town square.

Re: The Twitter Files

#765

Post by wyclif »

Taniwha wrote: post #698
romellem wrote: post #296

Earlier 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

And besides at the time Trump was the government

Trump was not the government. He was only the chief executive. Ever heard of separation of powers? The Congress, the Senate?

Re: The Twitter Files

#766

Post by martimarkov »

I find it really surprising and sad that even on HN ppl are just as dumb and biased when it comes to their political views. You are NOT this or that party. Sometimes your side or your heroes or whatever you want to called them fuck up - they are humans. If you don’t hold them to account on this - what’s the point…

Just looking at the comments - it’s pretty obvious that ppl didn’t bother to read the entire thing, talk out of their ass based on what they’ve heard at some point in the past and don’t want to actually debate.

They want to just echo their voice, stay in the amplification room and bicker and argue.

Like what’s the point of even sharing this data if we are not gonna go through it?!? What’s the point of not saying okay let’s see what’s actually here? We are supposed to be engineers and ppl of science- we should accept that if new data is presented it’s our soft obligation to examine it and change our theories and hypothesis to comply with or reconcile the newly observed data.

To me the lesson is that most likely I do the same so I need to pay more attention internally when it comes to something I care about.

If ppl are offended by my comment - don’t be that wasn’t my intention. I just hold everyone on HN to a much higher standard than the general public.

Re: The Twitter Files

#767

Post by RonaldRaygun »

tmaly wrote: post #383
noah_buddy wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s blowing my mind to see people on Twitter reading the story and thinking this is an issue of whether or not Hunter Biden is a problem. This is clearly the much more pernicious issue that 1. social media companies are massively influencing the dissemination of information on an ad hoc basis informed by personal political whims and 2. even the leaders of these organizations are unable to rein in these influences.

It seems this could have had a big impact on the election. Now that we know the laptop is real, what do you think will come of it?

Well, we all know what Hunter Biden's genitals look like now. So there's that I guess.

I suppose Musk is saving the real bombshell for... later?

Re: The Twitter Files

#768

Post by martimarkov »

Dem_Boys wrote: post #197
purple_ferret wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this surprising? People get things resolved via Hacker News when people comment on CEO account comments (Stripe comes to mind). Nearly every company probably has direct lines of access for resolutions for VIPs, politicians not excluded.

Not surprising but sad. Politicians should be excluded from what you're talking about IMO. They're elected to serve the people and stand for our American beliefs including the freedom of speech. A political party (the DNC in this case) getting tweets removed probably isn't a 1st amendment violation. But it's really shady and anyone from government (the white house in this case) getting tweets removed is likely violat…

I’m pretty sure first amendment does not apply to corporations and their services. The test I normally ask ppl to perform is this. If you think there is some sort of fallacy in it happy to discuss it

Can I kick you out of my hours if I disagree with your view?

Can I kick you out of my bar if I disagree with your views?

Can I kick you out of my platform if I disagree with you?

Re: The Twitter Files

#769

Post by meetingthrower »

fattire wrote: post #561
andreyk wrote: post #108

It 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…

Here is an account of the whole laptop decision on Kara Swisher's podcast from the perspective of Twitter's former safety chief Yoel Roth. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/why-twitters-former-sa...

Really good podcast and Kara has always been a treasure. Her takes on Musk now are hilarious now too!

Re: The Twitter Files

#770

Post by somehnacct3757 »

galfarragem wrote: post #757

Elon made one mistake: he openly declared support for the Republican party. Now "good people" want to cancel him. It's sad. It's my first remark on this subject. I'm not even a Republican nor have a Twitter account - but I'm really considering creating one now. I know that I will be downvoted but I don't care. It just got impossible to ignore: Sam Bankman-Fried has better press than him.

No he's made a few mistakes. Yes the political tribalism you describe is in play. But also there's the brutal layoffs, ridiculous work demands, withheld severance, and botched feature rollouts.

All have had negative impact on Musk's personal brand. Viewpoints regarding worker (mis)treatment depend on people's beliefs about classism, which doesn't map cleanly onto political tribalism. The botched features get flak because many people are just like Elon and (wrongly) think they could run Twitter better than everyone else.

Post reply on HN