This sort of justifies the viewpoint that despite all his bluster, Elon will probably run Twitter the way a "reasonable executive" would. Not just release the hounds. Keep the advertisers happy, but try to reduce the reliance on advertisers. Keep moderating content to reduce abuse, maybe eliminate the high profile banning but a person on the ground will have largely the same experience. (probably less action on more…
What is this Elon's account?
“Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
951–960 of 1001 posts
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#952This sort of justifies the viewpoint that despite all his bluster, Elon will probably run Twitter the way a "reasonable executive" would. Not just release the hounds. Keep the advertisers happy, but try to reduce the reliance on advertisers. Keep moderating content to reduce abuse, maybe eliminate the high profile banning but a person on the ground will have largely the same experience. (probably less action on more…
So I believe your comment to be in good faith but it's overly optimistic. First, whenever it comes to "free speech" 99% of the time people make that argument they're not arguging for "all speech". They're talking about "my speech". And most of that time they really just want to utter hate speech. Second, the idea of what's normal or acceptable is built on deeply ingrained beliefs that typically aren't rational. You s…
Look I’m probably somewhere between center and far left depending on your perspective and maybe that’s the point. For better or for worse(probably worse) the functioning of society is based on relative, not absolute belief.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#953Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is simply your skewed view and not how many people read the joke. She was named as "woman of the year" BECAUSE she was trans, Fine, and this is "simply your skewed view". Yours is not inherently more right than mine. >Because that is how Progressives have treated the topic in general (at least publicly, privately not so much.) You completely skipped my point. Progressives have treated this topic this way becaus…
> Fine, and this is "simply your skewed view". Yours is not inherently more right than mine. Yes, exactly, which is why banning/suspending them is wrong. A joke can hit or land based on who is hearing it. You not liking it doesn't mean it's inherently hateful. > You completely skipped my point. Progressives have treated this topic this way because there is no compromise position. No, Progressives treat it this way be…
This logic doesn't work for moderation. There ultimately needs to be a judge. Otherwise, "I was just joking" becomes a get out of jail free card for any Twitter moderation.
>No, Progressives treat it this way because they are scared of their base. If you talk to many in private there are serious questions that they are too scared to raise. But I'm telling you, if they don't raise them, they could politically suffer from it.
You are still skipping over my point. You are placing the blame for not compromising on progressives, so tell me what they should do. What do think is the middle ground between progressives and conservatives who think trans people are mentally ill and shouldn't be allowed to express their trans identity in public? How do you compromise with people with that view?
>This is just factually wrong. It requires you to allow them in women's sports despite tremendous advantages, in women/men's bathrooms (probably the lesser controversial ones,) to be legally held responsible for misgendering, to chemically/hormonally alter children, etc. That is societal buy-in. That is not the same as allowing a Jewish person to practice their Sabbath, employing a black person, or allowing a gay man to get married. I can't even think of anything remotely comparable.
We are not even debating any of those issues because the belief that the Babylon Bee is putting forward is so extreme as to be unwilling to concede on any of it. Levine wasn't competing in a high school girls soccer game. She wasn't trying to use a public women's room. She isn't threatening legal action based off being misgendered. She is simply doing her job the same way all her colleagues are and yet she is subject of public ridicule and death threats for simply existing.
How do you think that gets fixed? Do you think there is some negotiation to be hard in which progressives promise to give up arguing about high school sports and conservatives will stop sending death threats to any openly trans public person?
>It is actually very relevant and the fact that you can't see that is frustratingly hilarious. It's also funny you say it's not a weight-lifting competition, when a person born a male could theoretically enter a women's weight-lifting competition and completely dominate...and it would be unquestionably supported by some people.
Fine, explain the relevancy. Tell me how that USA Today article supports "the idea that a tran-woman could actually feel and experience the challenges a biological woman faces" or challenges "the fact that many base their identity on media stereotypes rather than the very diverse experiences of womanhood".
And yes, I specifically was referencing weightlifting as an issue in which nuance can exist. I was contrasting that with an issue in which no nuance can exist, the idea that sex and gender are the same and both are binary. You either believe that or you don't.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#954Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is simply your skewed view and not how many people read the joke. She was named as "woman of the year" BECAUSE she was trans, Fine, and this is "simply your skewed view". Yours is not inherently more right than mine. >Because that is how Progressives have treated the topic in general (at least publicly, privately not so much.) You completely skipped my point. Progressives have treated this topic this way becaus…
> You completely skipped my point. Progressives have treated this topic this way because there is no compromise position. Isn't the compromise position to tolerate everybody's own personal words and definitions? That certainly used to be the progressive position, at least up to about a decade ago.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#955Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Well let’s see… last time the former President was using his voice on Twitter, he was inciting and directing an insurrection against the government. So if Musk wants to reverse that ban, and Trump decides to continue his rhetoric which already caused violence (which he will because he hasn’t stopped since 1/6), then yeah, that’s a nightmare. I'm not american and just an outside observer. I believe the republicans/tr…
From inside I feel pretty certain that the Republicans will win decisively. The economy, inflation, and general stress levels are just too high right now for the party in power to stay in office. Not the outcome I'm hoping for, but the world is feeling pretty bitey lately. Here's a pretty good podcast on the topic, if you're interested: https://slate.com/podcasts/political-gabfest/2022/10/democra...
So lets say the republicans win decisively as you predict. What does that mean, what do you think the populus is telling the democrats?
Is it the people believe the election was stolen? Much akin to republican's clear response in the one link?
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#956Everyone seems to say there’s no moderation policy that will please everyone. Sounds right. But the real physical world has freedom of speech and it works pretty well. There’s a KKK meeting going on somewhere right now and yet none of us are bothered. Is the issue really freedom of speech or is it that Twitter puts people who would absolutely hate each other into the same room? What if you just fix that second part i…
> What if you just fix that second part instead of worrying about the first? I think that's an entirely different product. Something closer to Discord or Telegram. Would be interesting to see a pivot along these lines.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#957Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Well let’s see… last time the former President was using his voice on Twitter, he was inciting and directing an insurrection against the government. So if Musk wants to reverse that ban, and Trump decides to continue his rhetoric which already caused violence (which he will because he hasn’t stopped since 1/6), then yeah, that’s a nightmare. I'm not american and just an outside observer. I believe the republicans/tr…
> There is certainly a huge irreconcilable divide on how January 6th is viewed on either side. Yes, insurrectionists typically see their actions as justified, and will frame them as such. What happened was an insurrection though, and the 1/6 committee and DOJ have done much to prove that. > Lets not forget Hillary Clinton has always held Trump stole the election She’s free to feel however she wants. But note she didn…
I have no skin in this game, just curious what you think.
Why do you think trump said, "I am asking for everyone at the U.S. Capitol to remain peaceful. No violence! Remember, WE are the Party of Law & Order – respect the Law and our great men and women in Blue. Thank you!"
Kind of a pretty terrible insurrection as well, a bunch of unarmed idiots in costumes ransacked a few offices. Normally an insurrection is more of a 'round up the politicians and execute them' type thing.
Or was it perhaps not an insurrection and it was instead a riot, not unlike the 2 years of racial riots, that got out of hand?
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#958Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It’s amazing to me that the HN hive mind has decided that somehow one of the most successful people on the planet, who’s built a successful electric car company, a private rocketry company and was part of the people who laid foundation for a “payment system for the internet” is somehow doomed to fail in his new venture. It has been interesting to read it today. Fundamentally elon has simply called for politically ne…
> Is giving the republicans their voice back and allowing them to speak really such a nightmare? I wasn't aware Republicans were being suppressed for their desire for a more conservative economic policy, smaller government, and lower taxes. Or...which Republican ideas do you see being suppressed online. Be specific :)
That would be a pretty simplistic view of the republicans. Sure seems to be a faulty generalization fallacy to me.
>Or...which Republican ideas do you see being suppressed online.
Not many anymore. They realized their voices were suppressed and moved to new platforms. Now their voices aren't suppressed and oh boy midterms not going well for the democrats.
Re: “Twitter will be forming a content moderation council with diverse viewpoints”
#959Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, gender-sex separation has always been an oversimplification. The fact is that gender identity is driven by complex interactions between biology and society. There is no better explanation for why regret rates for gender affirming surgeries are the lowest across all of medicine .
I've never heard this before. Can you point me some place where I can read more?
Compare this to:
Prostrate surgery: https://www.europeanurology.com/article/S0302-2838(08)00764-... (19%)
Knee surgery: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6961288/#:~:tex... (6-30%)
Mastectomy for breast cancer: https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/964824 (8% -- and this is presented as very low!)
The satisfaction rate for gender-affirming surgery is in a completely different league from the rest of medicine. (And I have a lot of sympathy for the few people that do regret them -- I'm good friends with one such person.)