Twitter didn’t owe the Post free speech. That’s the main point.
Don’t like it? Buy something like Twitter and feel free to allow anything you want.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Elon Musk Is Officially Purchasing Twitter for $44 Billion
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don’t like it? Buy something like Twitter and feel free to allow anything you want.
I dunno, I think the difference between someone farming tweets with multiple accounts and actual political discussion should be pretty obvious to someone with admin privileges and tools. I'm not sure if that's what you'd call spam, but I think the average person would consider it abuse of some sort.
I'm not sure why it wouldn't be straightforward, unless Twitter doesn't want its employees freeform explaining why they took a particular action, which would be understandable. However, it's not hard to point to a specific rule and the part of a tweet that broke the rule, and Twitter famously avoids doing this.
I agree; I did acknowledge that it needs much improvement! 😉
Maybe. But it's usually pretty apparent whether someone is engaging in civil discourse or not. Unless, of course, you're going by Twitter's rules, which are at times overly nebulous, leading to these "open to interpretation" type incidents where some people have gotten banned for simply replying in disagreement, being accused of harassment of some sort. Even if nothing were to change in Twitter's current enforcement, a lot could be gained if they were far more clear about what various rules mean and how they are intended to be enforced, and what types of posts break those rules.
Yeah suuuuure believes in free speech. From Tesla NDA:
"You agree not to disparage Tesla, the Company's products, or the Company's officers, directors, employees, shareholders and agents, affiliates and subsidiaries in any manner likely to be harmful to them or their business, business reputation or personal reputation."
It was the very first post of the NY Post article containing the original laptop story, banned at the height of an election.
A bunch of other, more mainstream news outlets called it Russian misinformation. And since it was banned on Twitter, where global discussion happens, it was effectively and very selectively censored.
If Twitter was equally banning stories from the NYTimes, WaPo, and other outlets, perhaps you'd have a point, but to my knowledge, they haven't.
Just one more reason to avoid the cesspit that is Twitter
What a ridiculous waste of money , he really could’ve eradicated world poverty but choose to blow almost 50 billion dollars on what is basically a virtual waste of space
What a ridiculous waste of money , he really could’ve eradicated world poverty but choose to blow almost 50 billion dollars on what is basically a virtual waste of space
I'll give you that one- it's possible. But also it's the principle of a company like Twitter doing it that is the problem.
Buddy, who are you trying to convince? You have demonstrated you’ve never worked in a corporate environment here.
We did, now either stick on Twitter or boo hoo somewhere else
I hope that, under this new ownership, Twitter moves in a direction in which the dialogue of both sides is elevated well beyond this. Am I skeptical of that being possible? Sure.
But allowing longer tweets and promoting healthy discussion and not a culture of flame wars would be a good start. Can Musk himself be an example of that? Maybe not. But I hope the people he hires can be...
In other words, I hope that posts like the example above are pushed to the bottom of the heap. If they become too problematic, slap a question mark on them, but don't censor (by hiding the tweet), shadow ban or ban the user or suppress the trend.
I say all this, of course, even though Hillary does, in fact, "eat babies."
JUST KIDDING! I don't actually believe that.
Disagree– Twitter is a very good definition of the public square. It's free to join and there are an unlimited amount of microphones not just one.If we were to go with the public square analogy (using your description above), I'd say that the entire internet is now the public square. Anyone can setup their own website to express themselves.
Twitter is the megaphone or the soapbox or the stage. You don't let the town drunk dominate the microphone.
It's more akin to everyone yelling at each other in the public town square on an infinite variety of topics with some actually having good conversations.
The only way to make sure no one viewpoint dominates it completely is to treat all equally.
Yes, I think there are problematic areas, such as official gov't officials who spout propaganda. I hope some clever solutions can be found.
More of Mr Pedo being an alleged free speech advocate:
And here we have the anti-Elon mob, using a tweet of all things, that is hearsay from another person.
Hey, the straws are over there.
I'm not the one that is making it complicated. It's the real world that is complex.
"disagrees with twitters political stance." is open to interpretation. Is the post calling for lower taxes, or the genocide of a group of people?
Is the effectiveness of vaccines a political stance?
Remove trending topics altogether. I block the side panel when I'm not using a 3rd party client.
Is this a rule for the company or users? Not sure what you're getting at.
If you mean that the standard view should just be all posts from the accounts I follow in chronological order, I agree.
I'm not against this in principle, but I'm not sure what that will accomplish. Are conservatives looking for some smoking gun like:
If profile contains "MAGA" then post score equals post score times 0.7 ?
Unless you have the complete datasets that the algorithms are operating on, I doubt you can do much with it. But if they are understandable, knowing how algorithms detect spam can make it easier to circumvent spam filters.
For all the complaints about censorship of conservatives, one thing these platforms like to do is feed you more of whatever group you're part of. Click on a tweet from a MAGA user, and underneath any replies will be a dozens of suggested Tweets from other MAGA accounts complaining about liberals.
To be transparent. My how lukewarm we’ve gotten on transparency. I sense resistance to basic code auditing, kinda weird for the left.
I’d like to know I’m not being lied or misled by some algorithm that has been linked to my data mined history.
Well did anyone screenshot that tweet and share it again? Did anyone else think to share a link to the NY Post story on their website?
Like I said... I don't know about the one-and-only mystical NY Post tweet that got erased. Sorry.
But since the story was big enough... people obviously heard about it.
I certainly did.
There was plenty of discussion about "Hunter Biden's laptop" before the election. Remember? I do.
The problem is... I don't think anyone really cared.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Unless it's a very high profile account, most of the moderation decisions are probably made by contractors following a quite detailed list of rules. But no list of rules can ever be complete enough to remove judgement calls, and there are too many reported messages to go through to have a deep understanding of the context of a Tweet.
The reliance on the media some people have is dumbfounding.
Russian News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
Ukraine News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
Chinese News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
USA News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
Of course, people in the USA, specifically democrats, think no such thing exists, and that our news is truthful. And that we happen to be a global social media conglomerate. Yeah, nobody wants to control that.
Russian News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
Ukraine News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
Chinese News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
USA News - “we are the good guys, look what they did!” - Propaganda
Of course, people in the USA, specifically democrats, think no such thing exists, and that our news is truthful. And that we happen to be a global social media conglomerate. Yeah, nobody wants to control that.
Again, I'm all for transparency when it doesn't erode privacy of individuals, but I am skeptical that looking at Twitter's codebase is going to be all that useful for anyone. I am not at all resistant to Twitter showing their code.
At least I know that USA News will not be punished by their government for saying the "wrong" thing.
Code transparency exists everywhere for those who can interpret it. It’s useful for both those who can interpret it, and end users.
That is, if end users seek a transparent social network they can trust, which I think many want and will seek out. (See top free app in App Store)
Plus it seems like a marketable value proposition
Speaking of Trump Social... oops... I mean Truth Social...
Is it true that they don't have an Android app yet?
That seems odd. You'd think most Q-loving conspiracy theorists are using Android... not those hoity-toity Apple phones.
🤣
Is it true that they don't have an Android app yet?
That seems odd. You'd think most Q-loving conspiracy theorists are using Android... not those hoity-toity Apple phones.
🤣
it’s almost as if the media distorted your view on who these people are, perhaps (dare I say) under represented them.