Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#831

Post by djsumdog » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:35 AM UTC

prvc wrote: post #509

Could someone explain, from Twitter's perspective, how reading data from a legally obtained hard drive constitutes "hacking"?

It doesn't. This is a pure excuse and it's a sad one. The NY Times posted financial information, which is actually illegal for whoever leaked it to divulge: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVheQQ2sNM0

The tax leak was a big nothing burger too. If you read any accounts blog looking at the leaked information, nothing was really out of the ordinary for big real estate people. Did Trump use a lot of loopholes to avoid taxes? Yes, but everyone who makes over a million a year pays people to do this.

The Hunger Biden allegations are much much more serious. We're talking about a family member who was allegedly involved in key meetings with foreign states.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#832

Post by urda » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:38 AM UTC

prudhvis wrote: post #223

I have no idea what happened during the early 2010s. I grew up during the late 90s (born in late 80s) learning about the internet and its philosophies. Allowing Free speech still is the hill I'd like to die on. But the new generation of people, even here on HN and the internet hacker personalities I used to align with have turned so pro-censorship that I don't believe I'm in a proper reality/timeline anymore.

I miss the old internet.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#833

Post by roamerz » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:40 AM UTC

sangnoir wrote: post #185

Why is everyone ignoring @jack's official explanation for why Twitter blocked the specific link from being shared? This is the one falsifiable action Twitter clearly took. Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses. I haven't seen any reasonable arguments again…

Hacked meaning something like illegally obtained tax returns? It is clear who twitter is carrying water for.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#834

Post by frogpelt » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:40 AM UTC

sangnoir wrote: post #185

Why is everyone ignoring @jack's official explanation for why Twitter blocked the specific link from being shared? This is the one falsifiable action Twitter clearly took. Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses. I haven't seen any reasonable arguments again…

> I guess no one cares for facts anymore, as long as they see patterns that fit their preconceptions

How about you? Do you think Donald Trump called white supremacists "fine people" or do you care for facts?

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#835

Post by pqhwan » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:41 AM UTC

verroq wrote: post #136

ffggvv wrote: post #124

i remember during the BLM Riots, we had stories going around that jacob blake was just "breaking up a fight" between two women. when it turns out he had just finished robbing someone he'd previously sexually assaulted with her kids in the house. and twitter let it trend i remember they had a video of gunshot sounds trending with a description saying that an innocent 16 year old girl was shot by police when in reality…

You might as well delete most liberal media as well since anytime they mention a crime being committed and they omit the race of the perp you can assume they aren’t white. If they are white they will shout it from the rooftops. I watched Michael Moore’s Bowling for Columbine and I’d assume that for some reason these journalists thought that they can fix racism just not mentioning the race of the perpetrators.

I haven’t seen what you’ve seen, so I’m not going to deny your experience/impression, but my opinion is that the only case where the races of those involved in a crime matter are when the crime is racially motivated. And that’s the standard I’ve seen major media adhere to, but obviously there’s grey areas. If you want every crime tallied up against the race of the perpetrator, I’ve got bad news for you; that’s what the kids are talking about when they take to the streets against good ol’ racism, my friend.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#836

Post by kyle_martin1 » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:43 AM UTC

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #796

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #700

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wasn't hacked. It was legally obtained as it was left and became business property after repeated attempts of returning the machine. Jack's response came much after the censorship actions were taken. You have to analyze with timelime. his PR firm told him he needed to do damage control. Moreover why was this policy not applied to Trump's alleged tax return? This is one of many examples one could give. You may be…

So many people downvoting my comment but no substantive replies. No irony wrt censorship here.

More downvotes on this comment. The irony continues.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#837

Post by Natsu » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:46 AM UTC

boomboomsubban wrote: post #824

eitland wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses I think the idea is that if this is the rule, a lot of Republicans think it has already been broken a number of times against them.

Do you have any examples of someone's non-public contact information being shared without a response? Their guidelines permit discussion and linking to press stories of hacks provided they don't include someone’s private information, information that could put people at risk of physical harm or danger; and/or information related to trade secrets.

Blue Leaks comes to mind.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#838

Post by dude3 » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 4:56 AM UTC

sangnoir wrote: post #185

Why is everyone ignoring @jack's official explanation for why Twitter blocked the specific link from being shared? This is the one falsifiable action Twitter clearly took. Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses. I haven't seen any reasonable arguments again…

- Can you point me to a link of how this was hacked? My understanding is that the laptop was given to a mac repair place and then they didn't pay for it. I have no idea why someone would do not pay for their repair though. - A lot of people are focusing on the Donald Trump tax returns which were hacked in a way but accepted on Twitter. They have personally identifiable information too as in when you go to the IRS website it asks you for a return's amount as a means of verification etc.

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#839

Post by newacct583 » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 5:03 AM UTC

Natsu wrote: post #837

boomboomsubban wrote: post #824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any examples of someone's non-public contact information being shared without a response? Their guidelines permit discussion and linking to press stories of hacks provided they don't include someone’s private information, information that could put people at risk of physical harm or danger; and/or information related to trade secrets.

Blue Leaks comes to mind.

Was that shared on Twitter?

Re: Twitter and Facebook's action over Joe Biden article reignites bias claims

#840

Post by barbacoa » Fri, Oct 16, 2020, 5:04 AM UTC

boomboomsubban wrote: post #824

eitland wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Twitters official policy is to not allow publication of hacked material or information with Personally Identifying Information - and this material was hacked and had unredacted personal email addresses I think the idea is that if this is the rule, a lot of Republicans think it has already been broken a number of times against them.

Do you have any examples of someone's non-public contact information being shared without a response? Their guidelines permit discussion and linking to press stories of hacks provided they don't include someone’s private information, information that could put people at risk of physical harm or danger; and/or information related to trade secrets.

Saying a public person's email address is private information that could lead to physical harm is quite a stretch. If the NYP had redacted the email addresses they would have named a different excuse.