The Twitter Files • Hacker News Board

Re: The Twitter Files

#91

Post by madeofpalk » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:41 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #81

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…

> 97%+ employees donating to the Democrats

97% of Twitter (US?) employees donated to the Democrats? Is it normal for approximately 100% of your staff to donate to a party? This seems quite odd to me.

Re: The Twitter Files

#92

Post by dang » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:41 AM UTC

codefreeordie wrote: post #8

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.

No, this will almost certainly not hit the frontpage. The dupe detector has already started removing all the threads, even though on other topics it only engages after a topic actually gets picked up. Every effort will be taken to suppress this story, just like the story it's talking about. (And remember that dang has before admitted to manually editing scores and reordering the front page to suit his preferences for…

> edit 2 since im not allowed to reply to you @dang

You're allowed to reply to me just fine. Your account is rate-limited because you've been using HN primarily for ideological battle and ignoring our requests to stop. That's against the rules for good reason: it destroys what this site is supposed to be for. We ban accounts that do it, and you know what else? despite every ideologue's passionate perception, we do so regardless of which ideology they're wedded to.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33618426 (Nov 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33267514 (Oct 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32976185 (Sept 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32505278 (Aug 2022)

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31873013 (June 2022)

Normally I'd take the rate limit off, at least temporarily, since there's nothing you're saying that doesn't have a straightforward refutation, and I like answering criticisms and trusting readers to make up their own minds. However, I have to meet a friend for dinner in 5 minutes and probably won't be able to look in on this thread for a few hours. Since you've already posted a bunch of false and/or misleading things (starting with "Every effort will be taken to suppress this story" and downhill from there), I think it prudent to wait until I'm free to respond.

Re: The Twitter Files

#93

Post by PathOfEclipse » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:41 AM UTC

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.

How about the fact that they knew their justified reason for blocking the content, hacked materials, was an utter farce, and yet they kept on trucking along with bald faced lies?

What's the point of a public moderation policy if the internal policy is to do whatever you want?

Re: The Twitter Files

#94

Post by Dig1t » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:41 AM UTC

michaelgrosner2 wrote: post #44

cwkoss wrote: post #32

Some people are probably going to call for legislation to address this twitter thread. What kinds of laws or regulations do you think could solve this?

None, because the government shouldn’t be interfering in speech.

The whole point of this is that government is already interfering in speech.

This one specifically is pretty strong IMO (Biden team telling Twitter to manipulate speech): https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064

Yes yes, someone has already said something about one of them being a dick pic, remove that one, whatever. But do you think they are ALL dick picks? This email is one out of many.

Re: The Twitter Files

#95

Post by paulgb » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:41 AM UTC

Dig1t wrote: post #16

I'm a moderate, not a Democrat and not a Republican. I think people on the left have a blind spot here, that the more suppression they use, the more division they create, and the more moderates and people on the right grow to resent them. I would have identified as a Democrat on pretty much every issue, but this authoritarian suppression of speech and ideas has just pushed me away from that side completely. At this p…

Is there a smoking gun here that points the blame to any officials representing the party, as opposed to bad decisions made by twitter employees on their own bias?

I find the tweetstorm format to be not particularly coherent, and I haven’t followed the story closely enough to know who the actors are, but Ro Khanna (a Democrat) is one of the names I recognize and he seems to be against the censoring.

Re: The Twitter Files

#96

Post by ffggffggj » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:42 AM UTC

cwkoss wrote: post #32

Some people are probably going to call for legislation to address this twitter thread. What kinds of laws or regulations do you think could solve this?

Any laws “solving” this would actually be first amendment violations.

Re: The Twitter Files

#97

Post by Waterluvian » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:43 AM UTC

Dig1t wrote: post #16

I'm a moderate, not a Democrat and not a Republican. I think people on the left have a blind spot here, that the more suppression they use, the more division they create, and the more moderates and people on the right grow to resent them. I would have identified as a Democrat on pretty much every issue, but this authoritarian suppression of speech and ideas has just pushed me away from that side completely. At this p…

From a country with five viable parties: this picking sides thing, or even being a “moderate” is just weird and kind of horrifying how normal the populace thinks it is. It’s not normal. People should be FREAKING OUT that their governmental system is in such bad shape. They’re too busy cheering for whichever tribe they’re in.

All of politics being one dimensional is one of the biggest lies ever.

Re: The Twitter Files

#98

Post by TillE » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:43 AM UTC

fzeroracer wrote: post #75

Okay, since this is going to get unflagged I guess let me make this as clear as possible. See this tweet [0]? These are example tweets that people are complaining was unfairly censored by the government (despite him later saying there's zero evidence of this [1]). Now those tweets are still visible. You can go to archive.org and see them right now. What are these 'censored' tweets? They're photos of Hunter Biden's co…

Incredibly embarrassing that anyone thinks this crap is important.

Hunter Biden is not an elected official! Who gives a shit. If this were about like, Anthony Weiner, maybe it would have the potential to be an interesting story, but this isn't even close.

Re: The Twitter Files

#99

Post by throwawaylinux » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:44 AM UTC

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 is not even slightly odd. Everybody from the lowest pleb working at any company is made very aware that emails, messages, and any communication that goes through company systems or computers or phones are not private, and may be accessed by the company at any time for any reason, or be subject to subpoena by third parties.

> Maybe twitter's policies were bad, and applied inconsistently. But there is no clear evidence that they explicitly favored one party, and to be honest- I don't really care if they do. If Elon thinks this is some sort of big shock that will cause people to get excited.... I can't really see why.

Authoritarians love the idea of corporations subservient to government being used as a tool of the state to crack down on human rights. Lots of people don't see a problem with it.

Re: The Twitter Files

#100

Post by afavour » Sat, Dec 03, 2022, 1:44 AM UTC

refurb wrote: post #81

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…

You’re conflating a few things there.

It surely isn’t 97% of Twitter employees donating to Democrats. It’s 97% of donations by Twitter employees going to Democrats. I’d imagine the actual percentage of Twitter employees who donate to anyone is pretty low.

Plus you’re then drawing a direct line from that to access to execs. IMO that needs specific evidence. Plenty of tech execs are well connected to both parties, because they’re, you know, rich elites.