Twitter Working on Anti-Harassment Tool With Keyword Blocking Abilities

[Mascots]

No.
Get over it.

Exactly, things are changing so... get over it?

It's called ignoring them.

That is exactly what these tools are meant to help you do. And honestly, you sounds like you have no real understanding of how screwed up Internet harassment is or can get. People are truly disgusting in unimaginable ways and that is why Twitter is taking these steps.

I didn't realize that wanting to hide content calling me (and others) some disgusting things was to get a promotion to special snowflake.

Edit: And just to point out, I think there's a very sharp difference to telling someone to off themselves in relation to a game (bc they're better or worse than you) or in some isolated context, and literally having hordes of people on the Internet personally attempting to break you down. I don't condone the latter, but the way you phrase it makes it sound as though the extent is a random person saying that and moving on - it's much more than that these days.

 

[Nunyabinez]

I am concerned about these kinds of things because as someone that teaches at a university the idea of "safe spaces" is very troublesome to me.

People need to learn to be able to engage in a discussion with someone who thinks differently than they do, including ideas that may be somewhat offensive. Just shutting those voices down is clearly wrong and I am very much against telling people that their personally held beliefs cannot be spoken, even when those may be seen by some as politically incorrect, homophobic, or even racist.

However, I am also concerned about people bullying someone. For example, I would support someone's right to tell a gay person that they believe their behavior is contrary to God's will, just as I would support someone saying that to believe in God in the first place is an illogical and unsupportable position. Mature adults can discuss and disagree without having to silence the other's opinion.

But once it devolves into personal attacks, suggestions to kill one's self or other bullying type behaviors, it crosses a line for me. I just don't know how software is going to make that fine distinction between healthy disagreement and cruel attacking.

 

[Mascots]

But once it devolves into personal attacks, suggestions to kill one's self or other bullying type behaviors, it crosses a line for me. I just don't know how software is going to make that fine distinction between healthy disagreement and cruel attacking.

Personally, in Twitter case, by stifling the relentless attacking and trolling, healthy disagreement can once again flow on the platform which will be a net positive. There's just so little incentive to have it at this point.

I also think the idea of these college-style-safe-spaces are silly and not-that-much-of-a-thing. My idea safe space can be something like an LGBT group meeting or a Cultural Center for diversity, not so much of an echo chamber of self-affirmation - which does happen, don't get me wrong, but I feel like happens on a lot less scale than perceived.

 

[Menopause]

@tim_cook will block 'Mac', 'MacBook Pro', 'Thunderbolt Display'.

 

[Urban Joe]

Twitter is what you make it. You find what you're looking for. It seems like free speech is hard for some people to handle...maybe that's the point. Is this an incremental step in conditioning people to spurn free speech? I wonder. It seems that way. Remember censoring speech is an attempt to control thought. Odd that today many times just the mention of morality or right and wrong makes people convulse as if they are undergoing an exorcism.

 

[sudo1996]

Edit: And just to point out, I think there's a very sharp difference to telling someone to off themselves in relation to a game (bc they're better or worse than you) or in some isolated context, and literally having hordes of people on the Internet personally attempting to break you down. I don't condone the latter, but the way you phrase it makes it sound as though the extent is a random person saying that and moving on - it's much more than that these days.

No, I see no difference. These are all either anonymous or unknown people, right? If anything, it's worse in the game because you have something to feel bad about if you're not playing well. And yes, I've already seen the worst of the Internet. CS:GO, Twitter, YouTube, 4Chan, you name it.

 

[0098386]

This is a good idea! Twitter is becoming a bit of a cesspit with alt-right, gamergate and other hate groups. I don't mind them talking to each other - I just don't want to see that kind of stuff.
[doublepost=1472245829][/doublepost]

I am concerned about these kinds of things because as someone that teaches at a university the idea of "safe spaces" is very troublesome to me.

I find the ones against "safe spaces" are the ones who don't understand it. Sure it has the potential to be misused, like free speech... but that's just part of it, like free speech.

It's like people who are confused about "trigger warnings". A trigger warning is "this presentation contains flashing lights so those with epilepsy take note" or "this fire is hot don't touch it without proper care or equipment", or "this deals with XYZ issue". That's all these things are. Generally I find those against these are also against mental health issues being taken seriously. There's some kind of venn diagram of the two (those unsure what these are, and those who don't care about others mental health).

But YMMV.

 

[Mascots]

No, I see no difference. These are all either anonymous or unknown people, right? If anything, it's worse in the game because you have something to feel bad about if you're not playing well. And yes, I've already seen the worst of the Internet. CS:GO, Twitter, YouTube, 4Chan, you name it.

It seems like you are invariably ignoring the breadth and effect or purposely downplaying it because abuse on Twitter is a common trend and relatively important topic in the last year. There's really no debate behind that part.

 

[sudo1996]

It seems like you are invariably ignoring the breadth and effect or purposely downplaying it because abuse on Twitter is a common trend and relatively important topic in the last year. There's really no debate behind that part.

You bet I'm downplaying it. People need to grow up.

I don't really care about the filters. No harm done but no good either. They can try blocking harmful content, but short of just not using Twitter (or really most social sites), it's not really possible to be safe if you're so easily hurt.

 

[bpeeps]

Ah yes, let's make Twitter a safe space.



Unfortunately, many sensitive snowflakes are crying for exactly this. You know, because unfollowing or muting someone is too much work for their fragile psyches...

Edit: especially Leo LaPorte. That guy complains about Twitter non-stop.

When you're a celebrity like Leslie Jones and thousands of people are tweeting you slurs, death threats, and your nude photos, you might want something like this.
[doublepost=1472250266][/doublepost]

This is a good idea! Twitter is becoming a bit of a cesspit with alt-right, gamergate and other hate groups. I don't mind them talking to each other - I just don't want to see that kind of stuff.
[doublepost=1472245829][/doublepost]
I find the ones against "safe spaces" are the ones who don't understand it. Sure it has the potential to be misused, like free speech... but that's just part of it, like free speech.

It's like people who are confused about "trigger warnings". A trigger warning is "this presentation contains flashing lights so those with epilepsy take note" or "this fire is hot don't touch it without proper care or equipment", or "this deals with XYZ issue". That's all these things are. Generally I find those against these are also against mental health issues being taken seriously. There's some kind of venn diagram of the two (those unsure what these are, and those who don't care about others mental health).

But YMMV.

AKA, people who don't understand have enough privilege not to.

 

[thermodynamic]

No one asked for this.

Maybe Leslie Jones did, since her issue is one of the most recent and as we all know it usually takes an upset hollywood actor to get genuine social change going (rare as that is and usually for just wedge issues) when, outside of tinsel town, thousands or more regular people could be treated worse and all hollywood does is make movies based on those events to get rich off of it, a lot of this has been going on long before the hollywood privileged started to cry foul.

Anyway, whether or not she's engaged in her racist trash (look it up, she is hardly any less filthy) before or after someone else made racist comments at her makes no difference. Maybe a little difference, she could have been more mature than to say nasty things about all white people...

 

[Mascots]

You bet I'm downplaying it. People need to grow up.

We're not talking conflicting opinions here, this is general harassment by exploiting the anon account or *i didn't actually say anything* crap. So that's quite insensitive that you can't see the actual harm and that this awful is generally cruddy but that's not really even the point.

You stated it perfectly: the actuality is that this is doing damage to TWTR. People are leaving because no one wants to be a part of that and this reputation is defining it. Regardless of your opinion of what constitutes as abuse or not, they have to move towards a solution because sitting on their hands have been less than successful so far.

 

[Solomani]

Ordinary non-celebrity people don't have a need to use Twitter so much.

Twitter is the plaything of the rich and famous, celebrities like Trump, Kardashian, Kanye, Justin Bieber and Taylor Swift…. they have egos that are easily offended. Their name-brands must be protected from slander and defemation, otherwise it becomes a public relations problem.

Therefore, Twitter knows exactly who their (rich and famous) clients are, and Twitter is simply catering to the needs of their over-sensitive egos. I'm not surprised at all that Twitter is doing this.

 

[sudo1996]

We're not talking conflicting opinions here, this is general harassment by exploiting the anon account or *i didn't actually say anything* crap. So that's quite insensitive that you can't see the actual harm and that this awful is generally cruddy but that's not really even the point.

Facebook bullying makes a lot more sense. Anonymous accounts really shouldn't hurt. No, I'm not insensitive. In the past two years, I've had a lot of friends come to me for help with their personal issues, sometimes involving self-worth problems. I've learned that those kinds of people are really hurting themselves. That's why I'm saying that if anonymous comments are hurtful to someone, that person has much bigger problems to begin with and should really just fix his self-esteem or whatever it is.

A keyword block on Twitter won't do anything. Even if it did, with that kind of censorship, those kinds of people just get more and more extreme until they misinterpret everything in a negative way. I've seen it happen multiple times, same pattern. It would've been better for everyone to establish a policy that you should expect and be able to handle the nastiest comments from unknown/meaningless/anonymous people and know how to deal with them. Next step is dealing with people you know being mean, which I'm sure everyone encounters, and it's a lot worse.

 

[cfedu]

We're not talking conflicting opinions here, this is general harassment by exploiting the anon account or *i didn't actually say anything* crap. So that's quite insensitive that you can't see the actual harm and that this awful is generally cruddy but that's not really even the point.

You stated it perfectly: the actuality is that this is doing damage to TWTR. People are leaving because no one wants to be a part of that and this reputation is defining it. Regardless of your opinion of what constitutes as abuse or not, they have to move towards a solution because sitting on their hands have been less than successful so far.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Elliott
The problem is your definition of harassment. Gregory Allen Elliot was prosecuted for offending a feminist, his life was ruined and his legal costs beers over 100k.

Last week another special snowflake said she was sexualy assaulted when a man said his name was Hugh Mungus when asked his name. If you can't take the heat, leave. As for the decline of Twitter, maybe their censorship is causing it, there is no break data to support that this so called harassment is the cause.

 

[steve knight]

You bet I'm downplaying it. People need to grow up.

I don't really care about the filters. No harm done but no good either. They can try blocking harmful content, but short of just not using Twitter (or really most social sites), it's not really possible to be safe if you're so easily hurt.

Well tell that to the kids that killed themselves they should have just tuffened up.

 

[cfedu]

Well tell that to the kids that killed themselves they should have just tuffened up.

I have a hard time to believe that kids kill themselves because of online anonymous twitter accounts. I think the last thing a child be bullied would do is to sign up to twitter to get more abuse.

 

[steve knight]

I have a hard time to believe that kids kill themselves because of online anonymous twitter accounts. I think the last thing a child be bullied would do is to sign up to twitter to get more abuse.

not just twitter but online bulling is a very real thing.

 

[nick42983]

It's more of a social issue than a political one.

Of course it's political. It continues in Twitter's tradition of censoring the Right while protecting the Left. This is a direct outgrowth of the ban on Milo. Which prominent leftists have been banned by Twitter, had their hashtags and tweets hidden, or untrended?

 

[A.Goldberg]

The gist of the article made it sound like these are user enabled options- Not necessarily forced filters.

On the one hand, if you're putting yourself into the public world, negative feedback is possible and frankly part of life. I don't want to sound like I'm blaming/shaming the victims of harassment, but to some level it's the inherent risk you take putting your identity on the web.

On the other hand, the Internet can truly bring out the worst in people, probably due to the anonymous nature- saying things they'd never say in real life to someone's, harassing people, etc. Such people need to grown up.

The article said it was placed here due to the political discussion. Almost every MR article has a social component. I don't see what's so special about this one. But meh.

I think "controversial" might be a better word choice than "political" in the first line of their canned response.

 

[CFreymarc]

A.k.a. Censorship

 

[0098386]

Maybe Leslie Jones did, since her issue is one of the most recent and as we all know it usually takes an upset hollywood actor to get genuine social change going (rare as that is and usually for just wedge issues) when, outside of tinsel town, thousands or more regular people could be treated worse and all hollywood does is make movies based on those events to get rich off of it, a lot of this has been going on long before the hollywood privileged started to cry foul.

Anyway, whether or not she's engaged in her racist trash (look it up, she is hardly any less filthy) before or after someone else made racist comments at her makes no difference. Maybe a little difference, she could have been more mature than to say nasty things about all white people...

Huh. I'm a white person and have not been affected by her words, I find it quite funny infact that the reaction varies so greatly. She insults white people and so deserves the wrath of baddies. But if it's done in reverse (Family Guy, etc) it gets applauded and white people don't bat an eyelid.

 

[0098386]

You bet I'm downplaying it. People need to grow up.

I don't really care about the filters. No harm done but no good either. They can try blocking harmful content, but short of just not using Twitter (or really most social sites), it's not really possible to be safe if you're so easily hurt.

But it's not "easily hurt" any more. Name calling is easily fixed by blocking - but what happens is they invite others to target the same person. It's nothing to do with needing thicker skin or anything like that... it's now about remaining anonymous enough to avoid vile people finding your address, your workplace, your school, your family.

It's really sad. And I think most of us that have been called "SJW's" "PC" or whatever the new term for "not being an arse" are fine with others talking - it's just many people want to publicly engage on certain topics but not have their home address listed because they made a tweet supporting feminism (someone tried to dox me - they found my deliberately laid incorrect info - because I enjoyed seeing a female lead in The Force Awakens).

Just my experience.
[doublepost=1472305447][/doublepost]

A.k.a. Censorship

Why is it censorship to you? Are you afraid that you're saying something that someone doesn't want to listen to?

I recall that comic, I forgot who made it, of the guy saying horrible things and a narrator explaining it isn't censorship that you were blocked - they just didn't want to listen to you. I'm sure you've seen it. I'll find it if you like? Once I'm off my iPad

 

[AngerDanger]

Now I can finally block all the posts of the idiots that complain about random crap all the time or claim to be pansexual or whatever they call it these days.

Your first thought upon learning that Twitter is implementing anti-harrasment tools is to block people who complain (kind of like your post) or who are… pansexual. Yikes, you've had it pretty rough.

I recall that comic, I forgot who made it, of the guy saying horrible things and a narrator explaining it isn't censorship that you were blocked - they just didn't want to listen to you. I'm sure you've seen it. I'll find it if you like? Once I'm off my iPad

Here you are:

The hover text reads, "I can't remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you're saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it's not literally illegal to express."

 

[Mascots]

I have a hard time to believe that kids kill themselves because of online anonymous twitter accounts. I think the last thing a child be bullied would do is to sign up to twitter to get more abuse.

It doesn't matter what you believe or think because neither is going to stop the fact that it is happening and action needs to be taken
[doublepost=1472323873][/doublepost]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Elliott
The problem is your definition of harassment. Gregory Allen Elliot was prosecuted for offending a feminist, his life was ruined and his legal costs beers over 100k.

Last week another special snowflake said she was sexualy assaulted when a man said his name was Hugh Mungus when asked his name. If you can't take the heat, leave. As for the decline of Twitter, maybe their censorship is causing it, there is no break data to support that this so called harassment is the cause.

Yeah, but that straw man has nothing to do with Twitter anti-harassment tools - this week people have been jerking off into photos and tweeting them at the women - there's a flip coin to every argument and if you think Twitter shouldn't take action because of what you said even though what I said is happening, then I'm not far off on your lack of empathy.
In your Elliot case, he was harassing multiple people - he didn't tweet something and end up in an argument that offended someone. You don't have to threaten to harass and just because it's a first doesn't make it a ridiculous case. He made it his mission to destroy them but then tried to throw his hands up and obsolve himself of accountability because Internet but was actually held accountable.

Also, if censorship is the decline is Twitter, even though it is not, then tools to hide harassment from your view are going to fix that problem, too.