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

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: The Twitter Files

#81

Post by refurb »

dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

It’s pretty clear that the policy was heavily driven by connections and with 97%+ employees donating to the Democrats (edit:of employees who donated), it’s obvious which party had the ear of executives.

What’s even more damning is how their own internal folks are sounding the alarm “how can we possibly defend this decision” and yet the decision stood.

It’s pretty clear that Twitter had a very strong alignment to one political party and that resulted in the deliberate suppression of an important news story right before an election.

It’s pretty scandalous.

Re: The Twitter Files

#82

Post by dang »

whateveracct wrote: post #53

HN is a weird place. Feels like the loudest political voices are alt-right-adjacent nowadays. Just yesterday I had to wade through Q-level talk about Balenciaga being the true villain in society (one user literally said the Latin translation of Balenciaga had occult meanings). 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 St…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33838941

Re: The Twitter Files

#83

Post by idlewords »

sva_ wrote: post #7

It seems like something like this will never hit the HN frontpage. I ponder if its really just due to the upvote/downvote + flag ratio. Edit: It seems to have been unflagged manually.

This comment illustrates why it's a good idea to prune these kinds of stories from the homepage. No one learns anything new or surprising from discussing this stuff here, at this point we could have the same political nerdfight in our sleep.

Re: The Twitter Files

#85

Post by lapcat »

mikkergp wrote: post #71
phphphphp wrote: post #51

https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598843310042279936 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?

This part is weird, and it seems like there was an agreement between Musk and Matt not to smear Jack in this process. But if you really think there’s massive corruption at Twitter I don’t know how you think Jack should be absolved.

> it seems like there was an agreement between Musk and Matt not to smear Jack in this process

Jack is still a part-owner of Twitter. https://www.businessinsider.com/jack-dorsey-saves-elon-musk-...

Re: The Twitter Files

#86

Post by [deleted] »

taolegal wrote: post #64
whateveracct wrote: post #53

HN is a weird place. Feels like the loudest political voices are alt-right-adjacent nowadays. Just yesterday I had to wade through Q-level talk about Balenciaga being the true villain in society (one user literally said the Latin translation of Balenciaga had occult meanings). 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 St…

> Q-level talk It's disappointing how there's real stunningly outrageous stuff and you just brush it away under the umbrella of Q. Epstein was revealed to have an ungodly long list of elites from around the world visiting his island full of minors that were sexually abused and trafficked. Hollywood openly cooperated with Weinstein for decades only for it to all explode. All were liberal, metropolitan social circles t…

[deleted]

Re: The Twitter Files

#87

Post by madeofpalk »

nells wrote: post #74
dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

They are not your emails, and you shouldn’t discuss personally sensitive matters using email accounts that don’t belong to you.

You seen to be responding to a different point than that which was made.

Re: The Twitter Files

#88

Post by nkozyra »

mikkergp wrote: post #68
dekhn wrote: post #66

It's still kind of odd to think that you can be an in-favor executive at a company, then somebody else can buy your company, fire you, and go back and read all your work emails (many of which would be extremely sensitive) and share it with journalists who then screenshot it and share it with the world on the same platform that employed you! This was always a possibility (and a probability- my friend was a lawyer who…

> . If Elon thinks this is some sort of big shock that will cause people to get excited.... I can't really see why. I don’t think he does, I think he can literally see engagement falling in the days after a stunt and he’s trying to keep it up. Matt seemed to imply there would be another thread following this one so buckle up

This does seem to be the play.

There is a story here! Politicians having direct access to social networks to suppress narratives they don't like is interesting. But 1) I don't think it's surprising and 2) it appears it was not politically motivated at least in a bipartisan sense.

A story but one delivered with the kind of panache to drive traffic.

Re: The Twitter Files

#89

Post by ffggffggj »

warning26 wrote: post #62

It's kind of interesting in the sense that reading internal emails is always kind of interesting...but otherwise, nothing here seems particularly shocking or groundbreaking. The only real revelation here seems to be that there existed some internal debate whether or not blocking the story was a good idea, which seems...kind of obvious? I'd be more surprised if there wasn't internal debate.

It was all over the news, seems pretty astounding to reveal the CEO at the time had no idea any of this was happening!

Re: The Twitter Files

#90

Post by ilyt »

phphphphp wrote: post #14
sva_ wrote: post #7

It seems like something like this will never hit the HN frontpage. I ponder if its really just due to the upvote/downvote + flag ratio. Edit: It seems to have been unflagged manually.

I love drama and chaos as much as any nerd with too much time on their hands… but this story has not a single compelling nugget to it. Like, the tweets so far are so un-juicy that I would like to ensure this doesn’t ever go to the frontpage so nobody else wastes their time reading this boring non-story. I wish it was worth reading.

Well if you're drama starved "just" confirmation that they purposefully manipulated public opinion, the thing that was already obvious, isn't exactly another drama to watch but nonetheless it's good to get confirmation of that
Post reply on HN