Convopage
See the entire conversation
9,364 replies and sub-replies as of Apr 16 2022
Why is this link not being censored now? Hypocrisy? Because the facts changed?
“This Shouldn’t Happen”: Inside the Virus-Hunting Nonprofit at the Center of the Lab-Leak Controversy
Chasing scientific renown, grant dollars, and approval from Dr. Anthony Fauci, Peter Daszak transformed the environmental nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance into a government-funded sponsor of risky, cutting-edge virus research in both the U.S. and Wuhan, China. Drawing on more than 100,000 leaked documents, a V.F. investigation shows how an organization dedicated to preventing the next pandemic found itself suspected of helping start one.
vanityfair.com
After Reddit, I took a break, and now I work in the world of Real Atoms.
Terraformation
Terraformation creates partnerships to scale reforestation with hardware, software, and knowledge based solutions.
terraformation.com
there's no distinction between supporting censorship of social media and believing censoring social media is necessary because ideas are powerful. except enthusiasm perhaps :p
why not censor abusive behavior without censoring specific ideas like lab leak? difficulty scaling?
Trying to bring order to chaos to mitigate harm is difficult when the chaos is like a hurricane and you can only look through a telescope. You never know what exactly to censor or why, and you're going to fuck up a lot, but you have to do it sometimes.
That's my takeaway.
your thoughts?
Generally agree. I think what Elon is doing is extremely dangerous and brave.
Great thread. Thanks for taking the time to write it ๐ ๐
Well said. Couldnt agree more.. Elon is wasting his time.
Hey layinka, Your thread has been compiled and published to the PermaWeb forever, visit permabot.xyz/t/thread/p/d4d… to view it.
Permabot - Thread by yishan
Your social media posts/threads on the permaweb forever
permabot.xyz
This is a good thread.
But humans have nuclear weapons and if you haven’t noticed…
Censorship is polarising.
It’s good that these groups fight online in a limited way. Online silo’s become real world silo’s and that super bad for the future.
Respect for yr experience running a social network at a larger scale than I have.
Social tech & Freedom are extremely important, & we do need a hero here. There is a monoculture leading the major US social networks. We need a leader of his caliber to put a team in place.
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
These tags were saved to the thread [Goodread]
This is the greatest tweet thread ever
๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ
So in nutshell..No social network - which allows 7 billion irrational people to be the real self- can be easily managed and live with free speech principles. Becoz thr are 7 billion irrational & uncensored individuals! ๐คทโ๏ธ
Very enlightening thread. Thank you for taking the thought and time needed to write it.
Your operational nous around social networks shines through in your articulation. Thanks for sharing!
Fantastic. You addressed so many questions. Fundamentally “free speech” is a concept that only exists in a world with a functioning platform or government. Take either one away and “free speech” ceases to be.
Question - a common narrative (supported by anecdotal info) is that the social networks don’t in fact want everyone one to get along as all the animus drives engagement. If the currency is eyeballs, then it makes sense to drive strong emotional responses. You disagree?
Agreed. I think what he means is the product dev and support teams want civility, but the owners like Zuckerberg of $FB thrive off of chaos on their platform
There’s a tipping point where the emotional responses (or charged ideological bonding) become dangerous.
So platforms built on “friction-driven engagement” have a real balancing act.
๐ It's this, thank you.
I don't think that's how TikTok works... And isn't that one (in)famous for having the strongest engagement?
This is all painfully bleak
An insightful thread, but there's a lacuna in it. To quote you, ideas are POWERFUL and DANGEROUS, which means that people who are interested in power are very interested in controlling ideas, affecting which spread and which wither. It's not all "if you could only behave"
The point is that the people building these platforms are not those trying to gain power by controlling ideas.
THANK YOU FOR THIS THREAD! And thank you @CoolAssPuppy for bringing it to my attention.
Reread the thread
Do it again and again until you actually understand it because it’s pretty clear you don’t and are just being reactionary and it’s your default response
I read his whole tweet & it felt so good reading it. The amount of information & reasoning is perfect. And then, unfortunately, I found your reply - which just.. idk..
I don't understand how anyone can say something so dumb immediately after reading this genius thread.
Many points here that are true, I know since I run a social network, but your assessment of there being no sides taken is not true. Elon probably took this action after the banning of @TheBabylonBee. That one case is ridiculous. Also the Hunter laptop. The valley is taking sides.
Maybe @elonmusk thinks that fixing social networks is equally or more important than a marginal hour of work on Tesla or SpaceX.
Re: qualifications/difficulty, he has the most active popular Twitter account and started/salvaged some of the hardest startups — hard to beat that.
Imagine witnessing twitter rig an election and still playing the “both sides” card.
Insightful thread - glad you wrote it.
tldr; if people are able to communicate without restriction it may lead to actual change
Your head is so far up your own ass you're trying to put it in Elon's.
Do you think it’s possible to open source different moderation filters? This way platforms can shift responsibility away from themselves and the people can choose the level of censorship they want in their feeds
The platforms can still reserve the right to moderate and deplatform in more extreme situations where things do lead to real world harm. For cases of abusive replies and bot spam, maybe open source can innovate faster than in-house teams.
Wow @yishan - I’m having a bit of PTSD flashbacks from being part of team that ran Excite.com Communities (web 1, pre-FB, pre-Twtr) we had much of the same dilemmas and much of the same results, smaller scale. Thx for ๐งต
Trying to control human behavior through censorship (content moderation) is futile. It forces people to find other ways to convene & w/o refute. It's a modern day public square being controlled by unelected officials who think they know whats best for everyone.
Your writing has a voice that's been in The Shit. Appreciate you distilling years of actual experience into this thread.
You do know you can own and to some degree control something without running it?
The only question Elon or any other needs to ask is if there's upside and if this potential upside fits into his plans all and all.
Seems like the proper analogy for managing a social architecture is herd management. Some users get culled if they take more effort to manage than they are worth.
This feels harsh to users because they aren't playing a game with the same goal.
Stability is the general goal, but like any organization there are multiple agendas at play.
That said, the critique that exercising control over the speech of other is anathema to free speech is not wrong.
This is the best thread I read all year. Thank you for your insights @yishan
This is insightful. It sounds like you think there is no solution to the eventual crumminess of all social networks. But question: its pretty easy to use reddit in a way that avoids bickering (you subscribe to your preferred subs). Couldn't we use algorithms on Twitter . . .
. to categorize tweets by general topic area? I.e., "politics," etc. Couldn't we then let users toggle on/off these tweets from their feed? A user can already do this by selectively following others based on topic area, but bickering always seems to slide into the feed.
You're currently in the 'reasonable discourse about running social networks' category - but did you know that monkeys are blue? Either I'm censored for breaking the rules of categories, or you can't avoid monkeys being blue, which is the point. Rules = censorship because assholes
spot on,don't remember blocking someone on @Reddit ,on $twtr I block people constantly,on @Stocktwits I have thousands of followers I assure u my block is way longer,subscriptions may help but for some reason on twtr far left liberals subscribe to @FoxNews just to cause trouble
With you on most of this, including the thesis, but people should know where our "collective dysfunctions" primarily come from and why simply reacting to them makes companies look like they're trying to be "woke" tylerberbert.substack.com/p/mobs?s=w
You say they aren’t biased but the Hunter Biden laptop story censorship showed egregious bias
Same with the COVID and vax conversations
It’s clear they are biased one way when it really counts, pretending otherwise is just ignoring the reality of the situation
If you invite people to your house, you need to kick people out if they do things that might burn the house down. Not hard to understand.
Imagine inviting the entire world to your house and trying to make sure your house stays intact…
The problem is who you choose to kick out. The guy with the matches or the guy who he’s blaming for making him mad?
Doesn't matter, whoever u choose their friends will hate u for it.
Current path is indefensible.
Disruption will happen at some point.
Might take a different form than "making censor/promote/demote algos public".
But ^ has potential.
Culture wars might shift away from platform blaming to gaming the algorithm.
New arms race beyond that.
Can you tell me why Twitter can't eliminate bots?
I agree with so much but you do not mention bots.
In the social media culture wars, bots are mercenaries hired to turn the tide in political discourse, amplify disinformation, and farm outrage.
Twitter gave us a report/block option to police the problem ourselves. Useless.
Enjoyed reading this.
Interesting thread with some good points. I need to raise that there is actual censorship on social. It's just not what ppl think. It boils down to Advertising and corporate guidelines, honestly.
Very nice thread - thanks for writing it
This thread completely misses the driving force of the entire problem. The incentives.
It's not the media, it's the business model.
OMG THAT TOOK ME 30 MINUTES! Why dont ya read me an encyclopedia and the bible while you're at it!
When you personal attack someone for their actions and talk like you know everything you lost my interest in an credibility. Once you go personal you show what people are calling a “side” now. “There is more than one way to skin a cat.”
Perhaps —
Discovering a way to thrive despite the inherent difficulties and pains of free speech in the Information Age is one of the requisite steps to pass The Great Filter.
Yishan- bad take man
yeah, but don’t omit the fact that elon is a giant bullshit artist who did not create tesla. he is a bad actor thru n thru.
Elon doesn't make rockets or electric cars himself, Elon is an entrepreneur who knows how to hire talented people to do a great job
render
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Your video is ready. Do you want it removed? Reply to me saying "remove" or "delete"
Very informative, interesting, insightful.
Seems like the "humanity's technological evolution outpacing its emotional, & rational evolution/progress" theme.
Even a gentle breeze can turn into a rabid hellhound tornado online.
People being people is humanity's greatest threat.
This line infuriates me. We didn’t go from cave to internet by being anything other than people! It’s hard, but it isn’t anything more than a new environment. When we make people the problem we make containing people the solution. Bad idea!
I really appreciate your thoughts on this issue. I’m a free speech absolutist but even I can understand and appreciate the nuance around the issue as it pertains to social media, which you brilliantly articulated. Thanks for that, and for your work at Reddit. Cheers!
Today belongs to Jesus.๐
Well said. Despite him clearly being a dick, have nothing but positive things to say about Musk. He is one of few doing big things that make a difference rather than making millions hit a big red button more. We need more musk's, not more Zuckerbergs
This misses the deeper point, which is that our most fundamental tools for processing collective perceptions can't / shouldn't be managed centrally / opaquely, yet the path-dependencies of social-media-as-startup mean they are.
If Musk can decentralize Twitter, I'm here for it.
And yes, I'm aware of the paradox of something perhaps needing to become more centralized (acquisition by a single person) before becoming less so (if said person's vision is actually a less centralized one).
Central planners and abusers of power think they always know what's better for you, though. "Just stop fighting back or arguing and we'll leave you alone." Not likely. There is a good reason I don't engage on reddit. It's a social retribution engine. This guy sucks at life.
Elon won’t even know where to start
It seems he’s already started with a fairly effective gambit.
Man you really cut through the volume of bullshit in the thread the right way.
dude i ain't reading all that.
Awesome thread. This needs to be seen by everyone but unfortunately won’t be seen by anyone(relatively speaking).
Great thread man, and we'll said. Thank you.
Good thread. Although, there are big differences from you and Elon M so many if your points can be made invalid.
I honestly don't want this to destroy Elon. He already drives himself way too hard and is getting older. Although he says life can't be all about solving problems,he has a real need to solve problems he sees. He is frustrated with Twitter and wants to fix it.
I think it's true he is a bit stuck on the old internet when it was starting and he was in Silicon Valley getting in on it,it ultimately led to where he is today,but things are so different now and he just doesn't spend enough time to know.
Elon doesn't exactly have many escapes from this shit. He doesn't take vacations,he doesn't do much except work and it's obvious he doesn't sleep much. He doesn't GIVE himself many escapes because he believes what he does is so important.
It's also true he is very emotional and pretty much wears his heart on his sleeve. Being asked in interviews about his heroes trashing SpaceX brought him to tears and he seems to take things pretty hard. That's just how he is.
I'm not sure how mentally and emotionally he could handle having Twitter but he cannot be CEO. That would be bad,if he's doing this,someone else needs to be CEO. Being blamed for everything will not be good for him.
Ultimately,I understand why he wants this and Im with him,I think what he wants is good,and Twitter is not willing to do it on their own,so he thinks doing this will force it. I hope he isn't making a mistake and it doesn't hurt him and his companies.
How do you explain 4chan then? It permits almost any speech and is almost completely unmoderated. It has existed longer than any network you've mentioned in this thread, and yet it is still wildly popular, despite its dated UI that is extremely unfriendly to newcomers/normies.
Thank you for sharing this. As another GenX internet person, what's really pulled me into the now of just culture is Tik Tok. The internet ain't what it used to be and trying to enforce those archaic notions is both harmful and, as you say, wasteful of precious time.
I like to think more people's time is uniquely valuable too than we initially expect, but I'm glad I came across your page today and I'm grateful for that.
1/ Aggregate the content of those cheering Elon owning Twitter to make a "free speech" platform – those accounts produce a much higher content % of social media destroying bile and behaviour.
2/ Increase bile, decrease engagement. Twitter popularity crasahes and burns and Elon losses. Or Elon steps moderation back up and an absolute storm of bile gets directed at him.
3/ To which any attempt to decrease that ego destroying sadness with "cute tweets" or further moderation only steps up the shit storm of poison memes.
I agree with the sentiment of this thread but with one big caveat. Social networks so far have all been about making money. Add users, advertisers follow, get rich. What if Elon didn't care about the ROI of his $54.20/share. What if to him it was essentially like opening a public
park where anyone could come and spew whatever nonsense they please? Now one could say 4Chan is the last remaining remnants of that that Old Internet concept but I think a platform like Twitter could be enough of a change to refresh it. But that is not to say the other problems
you late out will still exist and at some point there will be some limits to completely open expression.
that's naive
of course he will care about ROI
Then see the thread above for why it isn't an easy road ahead...
save thread
Oh wow, there’s a lot of wisdom in this, Yishan. I’d love to see you work this up into an article.
Thread of the decade. Thank you Yishan ๐
A thought provoking thread.
One interesting thing to think about is: what would Elon would actually do with the platform?
And the most obvious answer is that he would open source it somehow.
Which could, potentially, work. At least sounds like an improvement.
Thank you SO much.
This final sentence is where you lose me. I cannot imagine a more overvalued human being than Elon Musk.
That was a long rant…Fix the lack of education and morality in society and the rest will fix itself.
Appreciate the thread, but could you name one single account here that is left/woke and complaining being targeted?
Maybe he should just buy it & pull the plug on the whole program. At this point it’s doing more harm than good to the world….
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
These tags were saved to the thread [Megathread]
you lost me on 2 points: 1. interchanging of speech and behavior on SMs, not sure if faulty logic or Twitter style?
2. PROOF that ideas spill/manifest in the world in dangerous ways directly caused by SM; no anecdotes, but proof.
sounds like 90s video games debate. & still wrong
I really enjoyed your thread, but, if you feel there is no bias, why are there so few, if any, suspensions/account lockouts of high-profile far left accounts, especially those that promote violence, while twitter suspends a satire comedy site in the Babylon bee?
This is a great thread, but it’s not quite convincing to me. You assert that ‘there are these situations where a social media will just HAVE to censor/mediate, or the platform will…’ but do you have a good example? The lab leak issue - why did the platforms *HAVE* to block it?
Because muh “scientists were in danger”. Lmfao. Dude is just a rabid pro censorship advocate, there’s nothing redeeming in the entire thread.
Yeah, I don't understand. "I think right now that it's true, but in the past they had no other way than to censor it because running social networks are weird" or something. WTF?
Come on Nic. This isn’t fair.
Many people changed Their views on the pandemic & ensuing policy based on better understanding the virus , development of treatment, etc.
I clearly remember you being pro lockdowns and “stomping the curve” in the early days of the pandemic
I doubt you would be so gung-ho on being pro lockdown.
๐ฏ it's like someone tries very hard to come up with reasons to ban books, but there is no good reason whatsoever and doesn't matter if you're on the right or left. Banning books is dumb. Just like censorship is dumb.
Fucking redditor ๐
Because there were already an instance of racial attack on Asians, and leaving it uncontrolled would cause more instances like that.
In an entire nation one can always find "an instance" of that sort of event if one looks hard enough.
"The people I don't like inspire hate crimes!" is a great excuse to shut down voices you disagree with but is almost never rigorously justified.
David Duke existed before 'net & people knew who and what he was. No censorship was required. Free market of ideas took care of him. The idea that you need to put ear muffs on people, or tape on their mouths shut to stop unpopular ideas on 'net...is lunacy.
“His time is uniquely valuable” - I fully agree. Why is he doing this? Is it a platform play to ensure some level of access and control of the Global Megaphone? ๐ข. Perhaps a starting play for Presidency ?
Elon's not born in USA.
= No presidency
The first thing he could do is to get rid of the character limit of tweets.
I am a bit worried he just wants to turn it into his propaganda platform.
But optimistically maybe he can make it better.
(but I am not sure I understand the problems you have described.)
I hate twitter now - ever since they monetized it.
Not sure twitter can technically ....
be what it was initially trying to be (without crashing due to volume issues).
Epic. The only solution really is to have everyone in their school years run a social network. Some countries have national service. We have this. No other way.
How do you or anyone else determine the value of someone’s time and how can anyone external to one’s self be responsible for setting someone else’s priorities?
F*ck me.. that’s a lot of words.. free speech fixes this
Wtf is wrong with just using the block, mute and unfollow buttons? Solves problems in a jiffy.
And much simpler than overanalysing.
I read your thread, I don't think u get it (all censorship favored the left)
it is Freedom of speech and the entire western democracy is at stake now
You actually believe that only the right was censored?
The Faux Propaganda Machine has your number.
politico.com/news/2020/10/2…
Huge antifa accounts that did nothing wrong have been taken down. There is censorship on both sides, quit lying
Can't tell if you are being sarcastic or were in the Capitol Rotunda on Jan 6th, 2021 ...
The thing is, I'm an older zoomer, and even I remember a time of much freer internet. It seems like as little as 10 years ago, these platforms were committed to the principal of free speech. It seems like the culture war poisoned this ideal.
I wonder if it's somehow possible to return the internet to the principle of free speech. But I don't see it happening any time soon.
Trump shouldn’t be banned.
๐ฏ
So many assumptions in here that don’t align with reality
Literally so biased to his own beliefs and experience. I was involved in internet culture and never came away with this take whatsoever.
Once he said Elon doesn’t understand culture I knew the rest was going to be more bad takes.
The dude literally made electric cars cool desirable status symbols
How does your logic morally approve of banning Trump?
But all this bad behavior spreads and takes control because of the advertising algorithm. It magnifies content that evokes strong emotions. When twitter has to spend time censoring content, it's fighting its own advertising system. This discussion is incomplete without adtech.
This is true
Absolute cringe.
Straightforward solution:
Close all external APIs. Force all users to prove identity. Allow all to say whatever they want to say.
Charge those with a large following a fee to use the platform.
Done.
You guys are imposing a new, secular, progressive moral order on the rest of us, & enforcing it using your authority. No mention of 'hate speech,' grooming, gender theory, CRT or any of it. Your TOS represents these 'moral' standards, not ours. This is the elephant in the room.
Is it just a coincidence that most of your employees & upper management also supports this remaking of the moral dictionary? This is just a meaningless observation, tangential to the conversation? I don't think so, and I don't think you think so either.
I made it to the end! I actually read all the way to the end.
Tldr: Elon, you don't want none of this shit man. Your time is better spent on more important things.
“They DON'T CARE ABOUT POLITICS. They really don't.”
Is that why Zuckerberg spent almost half a billion dollars on the 2020 election because he doesn’t care about politics?
Zuckerberg's election spending was 'carefully orchestrated' to...
A former federal election official called the $400 million-plus that Mark Zuckerberg spent a “carefully orchestrated attempt” to influence the 2020 vote.
nypost.com
you gotta see it both sides as “they are playing the political game” AKA that manouvering you posted and “they don’t want to adapt the platform to the political game” AKA they “don’t care” about politics - they don’t want to care in a sense of feature development
You seem very convinced of some things there, but if it were actually true that social media companies didn’t want to control the narrative, they would simply let users choose their own moderators, and they don’t. Maybe true for you personally, but not those with leverage over it
If you’d been on the internet of the early 2000s, you’d be aware that all platforms of that era attempted their own form of community moderation. When platforms achieve a certain critical mass, community moderation is no longer enough.
Ironically, Reddit is probably the best example of this.
I didn't say community moderation. I said, choose your moderator.
Which has most of the same drawbacks as community moderation but to a degree worse. How useful is a system of moderation in which misinformation is censored only for those who already know enough to pick an effective moderator? The degree of selection bias would be staggering.
You're in favor of parenting adults, I'm not. What are you afraid of?
wow.. what a stupid take
how would users choose moderators? how often are mod elections? how can we remove a moderator for abuse of power?
That’s a very long thread to say you don’t know what his intentions are.
Almost impressive…
incredible self-serving nonsense from someone who ruined something beautiful to make himself wealthy. i know it doesn’t eat at you because you’re too arrogant, but it should. it should eat you hollow
Ideas are dangerous... You give up on the principle of freedom to spread ideas because somewhere some human decided to be the worst version of themself.
This whole thread is just your way of saying, sorry, guys, we have succumbed to the bullying of people who blamed our platform for an action of an individual, self-governing person, who alone is accountable for their behavior.
Treat your users like babies and they will become babies.
What this novella failed to address is just how many accounts spewing garbage into the network are NOT authentic human beings with real morals and authentic opinions. Some accounts purposely threaten the real lives of others. Violent threats, doxxing, etc.
And the real societal repercussions of networks manipulating their algorithms to increase the disinformation and drive up the discourse. Bad actors like Cambridge Analytica and others using the platform for evil. These should be the focus of regulation, not topic censorship IMO.
Furthermore, no single entity should be allowed to have so much control over something that is now so intrinsically linked into all of our lives. I think it’s worth considering redefining “social networks” as public infrastructure and regulating it. ๐ค
I’m don’t believe any individual or institutions should own social media, or more generally media companies. It should be an open and verifiable protocol. Everything is a step toward that.
Remarkable. Thank you.
Excellent thread, I completely agree. I who have little followers so not a big voice … but you don’t discuss the impact of bots exploding untruths to drive a narrative. To me, there is where the true danger manifested and what the social networks need to contain.
The 90’s were not just about pr0n & censorship. We cared about privacy & having an anonymous place to explore the dark side.
It was always an anti-social social network (BBS>>IRC>>chat). Privacy & identity have since been diluted but are still as relevant as free speech.
O sea que las redes sociales son según tu como los gobiernos, se obediente, no protestes, se un buen esclavo sumiso y toma tu cuenco de arroz
Taking Tweeter private and eliminating the army of bots is more important right now.
Tweeter should be the platform of ideas and civil discourse. With many layers on it.
How much of a subscription fee would you be willing to pay to have Twitter privately owned?
If an idea is dangerous, who decides this ? Dangerous to who ?
My problem with Facebook in particular, apart from its brain rotting algorithms, is that it allowed bad actors to harvest and weaponise people's data to influence democratic processes. This had very little to do with free speech and everything to do with greed.
To say that there isn’t a very concerted effort to push everything left is idiotic. There is a real agenda to divide people and the social leaders are behind it.
Says the guy who ran the most censored and free speech eliminating platform via Reddit. The place where it's pay to play in any major sub.
You can tell your opinion on this is based in self absorbed, narcissistic way because "people asked you".
Your ideologies aren't widespread
Or he will handle it all better than any of you ever did.
Also take a look at all the replies in this thread and notice the lack of support for anything you've spewed.
This would have been flagged on Reddit in 2 seconds.
unroll
This lengthy thesis was enough to catch @elonmusk’s attention. Here’s something that’s become painfully evident that you missed: if the past 2 years have shown us anything, it’s that there not only is but should be real world consequences for your online behavior (censorship).
That goes double for the Big Social Media. They have been carrying on and unabashedly pushing an overt agenda that is distinctly as odds with our country’s founding principles. It’s no surprise to me that their online behavior manifests real world consequences. It’s about time.
It must be hard being a god.
Policing everyone. Everyone complaining.
Needing to control it all.
But…what would happen if you just Let It All Go?
Allow free will.
Halo! you can read it here: threadreaderapp.com/thread/1514938… Talk to you soon. ๐ค
Thread by @yishan on Thread Reader App
@yishan: I've now been asked multiple times for my take on Elon's offer for Twitter. So fine, this is what I think about that. I will assume the takeover succeeds, and he takes Twitter private. (I have...…
threadreaderapp.com
Just because you couldn’t hack it doesn’t mean Elon can’t. He’s already done several impossible things. Not everyone is a genius with an eidetic memory. How about you just doff your hat and wish him luck?
great insight and many well balanced thoughts - but, imo, not the right conclusion. @elonmusk has obviously spent a lot of time on thinking about twitter already. he won't waste time on execution details. he uses money to move it in the right direction. and i think it's worth it.
holy shit bro go outside jesus chirst lord in heaven save this lost soul
I got stupider reading this ๐คฆ๐ปโ๏ธ
you seen this? A lot of food for thought.
You severly misunderstand the 1A. It literally gives any US citizen the right to say anything they want about anything they want
The only people on the planet that is allowed to discipline(censor) me is my mother, father, & God
Go read the Constitution. Then read the Bible
I have a question, what if the unending misbehavior is the result of trying to keep it in a bottle? When people first meet they can be a little hyper, try to impress, but they normalise and relax over time.
Also I don't remember being rude, being a mass societal harm. Certainly not illegal. And most countries have laws and infrastructure to deal with violence irl, and most of those don't "Minority Report" pre-arrest pre-criminals.
Also char. counts make hyperbole inevitable. Tweets are a lot of the problem. People can't express themselves properly on this site, people read past each other a lot because we literally can't couch our own thoughts properly without 100 tweet thread to dump two paragraphs.
It is always good to have the administrative perspective. The idea that the reason they holed the lab leak theory is because people were mean is utter nonsense however. power lets the politics in both intentionally and unintentionally. All you really have to do is follow the $
Can anyone name a social network that *collapsed* because of controversial debate on the platform? I can't think of any.
I can't see why a platform would care about the nature of traffic - unless the platform were under social pressure, or threatened by authorities
& it was pretty obvious with the lab-leak theory that the censorship was *not* driven by real-world ramifications but instead by:
- misplaced concerns about racism.
- Anti-Trumpism.
- Chinese governmental influence.
Remember - the theory wasn't merely censored, but condemned.
Great thread Yishan, feels like an accomplishment reaching the end.
I have an idea for Twitter. Why not open the moderation algorithm so there could be competing ones? People could even write their own. Then everyone could decide which one to use. Users would then be in charge of their experience instead of an all-powerful Wizard of Oz
(No comment)
Absolutely brilliant. Thanks for this thread ๐๐๐๐
And that’s exactly right, why expend the time and energy on Twitter? Unless he sees the potential to democratise tyrannical regimes using Starlink and Twitter.
"Ideas really ARE powerful, and like anything else that is powerful, yes, they can be DANGEROUS."
Congrats, this argument is what pretty much every dictator, since the beginning of dictators, has based his rule on, i.e. people can't be trusted to think for themselves. โฌ๏ธ
But what most people who value freedom understand is that you can't defeat a dangerous idea by ignoring it or suppressing it. You can only defeat an idea by engaging it with other ideas. And anyone who says differently is really an autocrat at heart.
Why Should Georgio be censored for his beliefs in Ancient Aliens? Should he not be allowed to discus HIS truth with other likeminded individuals on this platform? Maybe you'd suffer less Emotional damage if you just stopped Trying! Let users decide!
All you need to do is listen to the Rogan podcast with vijaya and Jack. They ARE biased against right
This is not what a "Debate" looks like. This is one man giving a speech while others watch. THIS is what a "debate" looks like.
TL;DR "the public is either too stupid or easily mislead, so we need to decide for them." Authoritarians are self aware enough to recognize this sounds bad, so they dress it up with incredible mental gymnastics to justify it. Disturbing.
You have highlighted the complexity involved in managing a Social Platform, however, that does not mean that the work cannot be done much better.
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
BTW, you can add tags to the saved tweets and threads by typing them in the mention as hashtags, e.g: #notion #marketing #self_development ...
So you make a deal with the devil (censorship) to keep a platform alive when hot topics come up? That never ends well…
This is an EXCELLENT thread, thank you for taking the time to compile it.
Dude I think you’re biased because you worked at like the shittiest social platform in the world
The main thing I don’t see anyone talking about in the short time I spend in this gutter trash of a site now, is @elonmusk is gonna make money no matter what happens and maybe, just maybe that’s the bottom line. Maybe you mentioned that but I quit reading halfway through.
And when you have long money like he does, he can get in Bitcoin late and still make more than me or you or anyone else. So once again, money is the bottom line.
It’s not the job, or right, of any company to override free will and police behavior -period-. We aren’t children and we have the right to our free will, including the natural consequences, good and bad, if that leads to “real world” harm, there are already laws in place for that
Sounds like "enforcement" is the issue in itself.
"and I think his time is uniquely valuable and limited." is it though?
Well said. It must be hubris on Musk’s part, because this is a fool’s errand and he set himself up for the winner’s curse.
One final point to make. Your arguments are made so much more impressive by your use of capitalization. It really does add to the merit of your arguments when you uppercase words like "DANGEROUS" and "LOUDER" and "ALWAYS." Kudos for the persuasive effect.
Yes yes wouldn't want the peasants to get any DANGEROUS IDEAS. Better they stay in line and know their place. Be a shame if you couldn't control the information they receive, then how ever would you influence how people think. Sic Semper Tyrannis
I’m genuinely curious, do you believe that there is a practical solution to this problem. Unfortunately, one that requires everyone to stop being cruel is unlikely. Even though almost impossible, what do you think the consequences of completely dismantling social media would be?
he's using his time wisely. he's just making money out of this. like everything he lays some attention on. let him be.
check dm asap
Why do the networks think they need to moderate just provide the tool stop up vote and down vote and let the masses have a discussion. Enable more blue checks. Require real personas within democratic societies. Eggs can exist but it only in places where free-speech is banned
Respect your thoughts and the very unique background that informs them. Respect.
But I disagree a lot. I've seen the tech management rooms. To assert that it's a desire for Peace And Quiet and not self- serving would be naive for anyone else.
(1/2)
This is a great thread, But you got one thing wrong... Elon Musk is the man we not only want to run things but he's the man we NEED. You say he won't be a good fit but I strongly disagree. A man who worries about Humanity and speaks 100% the truth is 100% the guy we want as boss.
I cannot stomaches it any further. I stoped where I last commented. if I am needed for trial, I accept. this man is guilty of murder and treason. that's just as far as I got. @NSAGov do it. thank you. bleed the pigs.๐ฉธ ืืืจื ืงืืืจื๐ฉธ game over.
This is the longest thread I have ever seen in Twitter
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
BTW, you can add tags to the saved tweets and threads by typing them in the mention as hashtags, e.g: #notion #marketing #self_development ...
Elon wants to improve the lives of people in many different ways
You don’t need to direct a person like that
It’s psychopathic to tell someone they’re wasting their time when they are a responsible adult clearly choosing to do what fulfills thm
Also for the record, not a waste
You sound informed, but I disagree with your conclusions
The problem could be solved by user-controlled filters in lieu of universally-imposed ones
But a vocal minority of elites insist on controlling the scope of permissible discourse—which regardless of justification is wrong
fwiw I am of neither a left or right persuasion—rather I am opposed in principle to paternalistic authoritarianism in all its myriad forms
Good read... furthers my opinion Jack and Mark both should step down. The job is too much for them at this point. Go meditate and stop letting outside noise dictate your choices.
great read thanks
This was such an interesting thread — thank you.
Nope. Where is the banned democratic president? Why was the hunter biden laptop story banned, but not the fake news russiagate? Why were people banned for supporting rittenhouse but not grosskreutz? It goes on and on, and in one direction. Your rewrite doesn't fly.
Despite your authoritative tone, much of what you're saying simply isn't true. Certain ideas are simply censored, not because of behavior, but because of the ideas themselves. For instance, tweets which examine alleged racial differences in cognitive ability would be censored.
Unless of course said tweets reach the "right" conclusion. But if they reach the "wrong" conclusion, then that's hate speech, and the tweets are removed, and that's censorship, no matter how distasteful we might find said tweets. You're not honestly engaging with what's happening
I respect your statement, but I think you have a mixed storm of ideas in your head. Unfortunately, I believe that there is censorship in the network on Twitter and that Twitter must change to respect that freedom of expression.
(1/2)
On one side, the algorithm must be open source to guarantee freedom and, on the other hand, set aside by the mainstream of today's tech titans of the limiting "progressive left culture" of ideas and thoughts.
(2/2)
If Elon Musk proposes to improve and open freedom of expression more precisely on Twitter than it is currently, it is cause for celebration... Or are you a globalist thinker with an ideological bias who cries at the possibility of openness and freedom on the net?
save thread
Nothing worthwhile is easy @yishan
Elon is an example of this. I think you might underestimate his ability to lead and organise people to execute a greater vision.
Cool story bro can I have my time back? You start off strong but then you continue to speak about what’s going on inside peoples hearts and minds which is foolish. @elonmusk is neurologically different and his head is built for the modern world in a way that most people are not.
TLDR: Good start that turned into you projecting a lot of stuff on others.
Given your long thread, you have been extremely convincing that the best minds like @elonmusk should be on this seemingly “unsolvable” problem. Probably there are other people who will be able to do Mars, albeit a little slower. Mars can wait.
As long as speech isn't breaking the law, nothing should be censored. And it's not about money to the executives, otherwise they'd allow maximum speech outside of breaking laws. The executives and employees are just as much involved in the political fight as the users are.
Best thread I have read for a long time. ๐ฏ
“The problem with social networks is the SOCIAL part. Not the NETWORK” well said.
Hope Elon agrees with you.
Whoever asked for your opinion hopefully will learn not to do so in the future. I think you are out of touch at best, but likely disingenuous. @elonmusk already did what we needed, called out the censorship BS. Nothing has been done as you put forth. You bring shame to your name
The reality is this censorship, must stop. I grew up with the internet, as it grew up. The thing I realized then is still true today, the only difference is now there exist a plethora of garbage to sift through to find the truth. but the hope it offered us is still alive.
You really referenced that utterly biased post about why Trump was banned? Since that post and subsequent replies you didn't re- examine your position? You're still 'there'?
87 posts? Really?
Even in reader mode, this “long” thread is an injustice.
Say what you have to in 140, else don’t. That’s the mission statement.
People will do what they want - free speech, war, virus experiments….
Pray for good luck, fight your battles - no preaching
I guess Elon can hire a trusted lieutenant or two, so his time won’t be an issue.
I think one solution to the civility issue is to abolish the delete function. Whatever one tweeted will remain for good as a matter of public record and everyone can cite it.
The internet that you think died, as reddit came into it, never died, the internet is still freedom, look at this here, @elonmusk very action here is keeping that dream alive, just because you've been defeated in your attempts at it, doesn't mean it's gone at all, you lost the...
your faith is all, which is understandable given the pressures you must of experienced in your role. But, that's not a justification for that actions that have been propagated on this platform, as the rest of them post covid. It's been an attempt to destroy critical thought.
US culture has always bent an ear toward conspiracy theories & unfounded speculations, culture has also been quick to reject the same in the face of evidence. Tabloids in the 80’s, Art Bell in the nineties. Platform should empower users to moderate content and validate cynicism.
Why was the NY Post banned for running the Hunter Biden story before the election? ๐ง
You're missing the point, and the point is to go head on into the pain of your insanity and lives with the clarity of a priest. If your notion is that harassment and attacks will "damage" him, you're missing the reason why it is even being done.
"He should be making cars and rockets, not fixing our psyches." Lol, Kingdom Comes.
All of this you just said for nothing. Twitter is for talking - if someone takes that to the streets and harms people that what we have cops for. Stop with your super long mans plantation of what an argument is. Arguments happen if you can’t control yourself JAIL DUH
Next time just write “I’m a commie”
Brain dead
Hope you read this: David Duke existed before 'net & people knew who and what he was. No censorship was required. Free market of ideas took care of him. The idea that you need to put ear muffs on people, or tape on their mouths shut to stop unpopular ideas on 'net...is lunacy.
You’re like “we’re forced to create problems to stop OTHER problems from happening !” That’s what you don’t understand - that’s the difference between you commies and us freedom lovers … it’s the problems we are willing to accept that makes us absolutely different, free = risk
Great post! I have faith though. People are discovering their dark sides through internet, and dark sides of current global systems. That’s ๐๐ป This is just another phase, a painful one. After which we will move into a brighter one, I (want to) believe๐๐ป๐
Great thread. Read fully. Huge respect for this take. And for such a thorough examination of the situation. I can say, I have some disagreements. Not really with the premises, but mainly with a few of the conclusions.
I'm not trying to be reductive. I understand the complexity of what @yishan is saying. However, the two big ideas: a) proclaiming that sm is inexorably forced to censor and b) being personally opposed to any kind of censorship, are incongruent imo.
The conclusion that Elon would be overwhelmed by leading Twitter I think is a bit faulty.
But again, a lot of weight should be granted to @yishan 's opinion here just based on his experience, I concede.
I just think the preconception presented here that an attempt to overhaul the seemingly inept leadership is all for naught is a pessimistic perspective.
I think it doesn't give enough to the idea that positive change is possible.
I understand you have a lot of insight, but you can’t claim banning Trump wasn’t political.
Some censorship is inevitable, or it would all be porn and crypto. But,
banning science? If that is inevitable, then this is a cult
Like if you made it all the way.
To say there was no "censorship" or "moderation" was wrong in the pre-facebook days. A common saying was "don't feed the trolls". Now there's a lot of trolls and the social contagion has spread. Normies kind of ruined it by infecting themselves and normalizing trolling.
Trolls aren't being banned enough. In real life they would have been thrown out of the institution they were causing intentionally causing chaos in. That's what I partially agree with you on. But the trolls have to go or the fire only spreads.
You sir have just earned a follow
This thread jumps around a lot my take away is...
It assumes that not being on the internet means you don't have freedom of speech. This assumes that a person not on the internet has less worth.
Elon wants twitter because it helps drives his self esteem 1st & wealth 2nd.
Good thread. The hybridization of broadcast virality and private discussion means social networks that aren’t private (or with topic algorithms) need to be regulated like broadcast licenses.
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
BTW, you can add tags to the saved tweets and threads by typing them in the mention as hashtags, e.g: #notion #marketing #self_development ...
You're full of shit.
Summary: Let ppl go at each other/compete without referee or police, things will get nasty and injuring. Have referees or police they will complain why only they are treated unfairly and only see the human errors of refs/LEO. Human nature at work.
This whole thing hinges on 2 key premises:
1) That there is an 'old' free speech & a 'new' free speech
There isn't. Free speech is free speech
2) Censorship's equal on both 'sides', & thinking otherwise is just due to bias
This is clearly, observably untrue. We all know it
So the solution is leave tw to the ‘dimwits’ who kicked Jack? Nah. Don’t tell others what to do, let Elon have a go.
Tw issue is not only censorship, they have a report system tailored down for specific things (*) but have never done a thing about p~dos.
They always come back.
(* which certain groups use to mass report and silence dissident opinions, and these reports are never reviewed, just enforced because “a lot of people said it so it must be true”
Thats how some friends find themselves IP-blocked, because apparently in the TOS -
- theres a rule for ‘circumventing a ban’ but the accounts of pds always come back an are never taken down under the same premise.
Which makes one think they have some kind of special protection)
So no. I’d rather let someone new take over.
Good luck, I'm sure a bunch of people believes you but I don't. Yes they don't care about politics ;) yes Jack is Christ reborn okay? Maybe he "meditate" so much because he knows all the bad and evil he got into society. ;)
If only I could’ve “liked” the whole thing to save time.
An excellent summary of the problems of social media in a real and politicised world ๐
Oh my! The problem is us, the humans. Fixing us is like playing wack-a-mole unsuccessfully. The comments to this thread prove it. Bravo! Brave writing here.๐๐ฝ
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
BTW, you can add tags to the saved tweets and threads by typing them in the mention as hashtags, e.g: #notion #marketing #self_development ...
please unroll
So metaphorically Global Free Speech is a large heavy boulder and every social network is a platform upon which it rests, but they’re all too flimsy to hold it so cracks soon appear, then they have a choice to build a support underneath (censorship) or else the platform shatters.
You are underestimating Musk's manipulative skills(he is superior in terms of intelligence to both the previous and the current twitter CEOs)which have brought him to the point he is.He may put front committees of publicly trusted people to do his bidding and most will go with it
This is a long drawn out thread basically for you to just say:
>You've sold out
>And you need to turn in your 90s cred card
Twitter (and all of these sites) becoming an uncensored cess pool that people log-off from would be an unquestionable good. Monoculture is bad. Someone in New york being fired because someone in California saw their objectionable tweet is bad. Let it rip.
Yes, let it all dissolve into a Usenet-like decentralized network that's not a "platform" run by a company anymore. Let it all die.
What would mean the collapse of the platform? ๐คจ๐ค
I think he means it would eventually drive most users off the platform meaning you no longer are a social media platform.
Is there a minimal critical mass of users to be a Social Media Platform? That sounds me like a "no true scotsman" argument -
Your logical fallacy is no true scotsman
You made what could be called an appeal to purity as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument.
yourlogicalfallacyis.com
Why would the platform collapse if people argued a lot or even if their speech led to forming groups and those groups having violence? What's the scenario? What would have happened if youtube and fb allowed "antivaxxers" to spread their "disinfo"?
So why are platforms promoting abortions instead of having kids when the population of high gdp countries have below replacement level fertility rates?
Maybe this is his endgame, to collapse Twitter.
Would be a noble end game for him- let’s see if he does it.
We can all live in the present moment where we are and breathe freely.
So you’re fine with market manipulation. Got it.
This is a circular line of reasoning that excuses your claim that there is no choice but to censor.
Why would Twitter die if anyone could say anything?
Emergence is vague until you define it.
Trickling into meatspace is not sufficient, we have laws to handle that.
Collapse is a good solution here
If you take away the consequences of people’s bad actions, you can’t expect them to learn from the process. Leeman brothers should have fallen. So should Twitter. Don’t come and make out like twatter must survive at all costs.
I don’t know why I’m still reading this many posts into a totally absurd thread, but you just keep begging the question over and over and over. Did you do this intentionally? Like, rather than assert “X IS ALWAYS TRUE, TRUST ME I RAN REDDIT”, could you try making an argument?
Amazing thread.
Been looking for arguments of why it's a bad idea that Elon owns Twitter.
Didn't yet consider that it could make him distracted and/or unstable.
Seeing a couple of pros, also. Curious what you think about them?
Musks takeover could mean that Twitter can go private and not have the same growth/profit pressure
๐ Less bots
๐ More algorithmic/moderation control by users and communities
๐ More data openness, enabling decentralisation of clients and social graph
๐ More open discourse
Also, what is the mechanism by which the platform will collapse?
This is such utter bollocks. The problem is Millennials and Zedders have been so mollycoddled they don't know how to put up with being offended. They're going to have learn just like every generation did before them. Words are not 'violence'. They're just words.
Bollocks. Where’s the evidence for a collapse?
er ... Truth Social?
Perhaps the alternative is to get rid of anonymous speech platforms in favor of those requiring accounts that are connected to authenticated, real-life individuals.
1/ I appreciate your perspective. Have to say though, it's a little weird to hear someone setting a forest fire blame the trees for the conflagration.
2/ If all social networks were just neutral public commons, essentially billions of people all talking about the same time and same volume, I'd agree with your garment rending over the classless masses and their barbarian ways. But the giant networks aren't neutral.
3/ Once Twitter and Facebook and others found engagement drives revenue, and that boosting engagement was good for the bottom line, they started handing out megaphones to people. Turns out anger, hate, and division drove engagements, and this profits, the highest.
4/ So guess who gets the megaphones? And guess who drives the conversations? And guess who turns FB and Twitter into hotbeds of conspiracy theories, mob hysteria, doxing, and hate campaigns that literally kill people? You can see why many folks are dusting off their tiny violins
5/ If the major organs of public speech online undertook reforms to tone down the rhetoric, stop handing out kindling and you wouldn't have to put out so many fires later. Make the public square neutral again. If you stop handing out megaphones to the lowest common denominator...
6/ Then you won't be called to account in silencing them. Stop pretending the social media companies themselves are innocent bystanders throwing their hands up in the air. You aren't responsible for people being crazy, but you are for elevating them.
Why? Why would it collapse if there is a lot of engagement happening on the platform?
False premises — about Trump “inciting insurrection” and woke leftists being censored, too— tell me you are trying to sound objective, but are not.
And your definition of spam is a tell. Stopping it means social nets should also let their leftist human moderators define non leftist ideas as dangerous? Sounds like something a left wing exec would conveniently say to rationalize their one sided-ness.
Ideas can be dangerous? It depends on one’s values. Communists like Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot killed 100m people. Yet Americans still argue for Communism. Dangerous? Censoring them— like the Communists did their opponents— would be.
The prevailing millennial view that “everything is different now” is alternatively naive, uninformed and narcissistic. Your “content moderation” isn’t saving the world. Censoring ideas is totalitarian & usually leads to violent conflict. See Ukraine.
The *really* hard problem here seems to be what FB encountered -- userbase in some random country (Myanmar?) where you have ~no employees and no connection, but where you have users, doing very local bad things. (Or rural Indian stuff, etc.)
You find people who know the ground and you hire them to police the T&Cs. It's not censorship, it's contractual. It's also quite expensive and hard, but no more than technical infrastructure. I've done some of this stuff, they can do it too. And no, Musk is not the man for this.
I think Myanmar has also been uniquely difficult in the past because they haven't standardized on Unicode (instead predominantly using Zawgyi), so all of the methods a company might use to try and automate the detection and enforcement fall apart pretty quickly there.
Automated tools are useful, but there is no substitute for humans who can understand what other humans do.
The policy here would be to only allow use of the languages you can deal with. |t sounds sectarian, but it's essential. You cannot provide service otherwise.
Ok so you believe Myanmar should be barred from the global internet until they are a wealthy enough population to be worth spending lots of money supporting?
And Unicode's not specifically language, it's encoding of language, which is a more specific and less generalized problem
I'm talking as a provider of a singular social network, not the God Of The Global Internet. People conflate FB and that, but there is a difference. If you can't support people properly, you shouldn't offer them your service. Others who can, can. What's wrong with that?
The media is the voice of the left’s agenda. The 1st amendment applies to government actions. However, most media outlets are in effect agents spreading the leftist government’s agenda. Such biased censorship is unacceptable should be enjoined rather than permitted by contract.
I've been part of the media at every level from editorial assistant to executive editor. Nobody has ever tried to enforce, or even talk about, a political agenda with me. How would your claim work, in practical terms, while being completely shielded from the workers?
It’s at the highest levels. Things may have been different before, and it seems that they were, but surely intelligent people these days can compare what’s really going on to what the mainstream media reports.
You're not answering the question. What mechanisms can Impose the top level agenda you posit on an independently minded workforce which questions its management as much as anything else? How does that work?
I don’t believe that they’re independently-minded anymore.
Employees know what the higher-ups want them to say, and in the same vein, media organizations hire those with the “correct” agenda who will obey cheerfully.
No. Nobody at any level had anything approaching that kind of discussion. Èditorial standards were set by editors. You knew the commercial imperatives of the organisation, which is how political influence is really set, but nothing as crass as you posit.
All I can say is that things have really changed. Mainstream media is infested with bias. Many are finally starting to understand. Btw, people are allowed to have different beliefs than you and that does not make them bad people.
"running" is tiresome, tiring. Haven't met a newspaper editor who wasn't tired. Haven't met a policeman who wasn't not tired. Editor doesn't know why-if his next meal will be funded, Policeman knows why-who funds the salary forever. Read-it having become reditor must be tiring.
you have infinite more experience then I, and yet I must dispute the crux on which your whole thread lies. If humanity cannot behave on the internet, then we cant behave on the internet. No need to adjudicate, arbitrate, whatever. If it is our nature to destroy ourselves, let it.
What if we gave everyone what they want?
Backend: uncensorable data
Multiple Frontends: filters based on the preferences of the user niche
No one to yell at about taking down the backend data as it can't be done - but your circle gets protected from unwanted content.
Well, that is what i do 2 years. Free Speech project on VIZ readdle.me
federated networks like Mastodon *sort of* hit that angle, but in a very different way, as there's no single "backend" or source of truth - but let me also tell you, you probably don't *want* one. If you have a thing that can't delete and is public, you'll get in trouble quickly.
Both because no doubt some horrible things will end up there and even if the backend is distributed, someone somewhere will be judged as responsible for making it accessible - and also more benignly, because holding personal data with no delete function breaks laws like GDPR.
Any large scale truly uncensorable storage that is successful beyond a small niche of enthusiasts will inevitably hit issues there. For the same privacy reasons it also seems fundamentally undesirable, as it means if you ever accidentally overshare, it's out there forever.
Public posts are not personal data. But say someone leaks personal data. All front ends that wish to comply will filter out such content.
Author can self delete
Mm. It doesn't become legal to have child pornography on servers you own just because you "can't censor it".
Relying exclusively on moderation and censorship is futile.
The issue with social networks is rather systemic.
The freemium model is no longer needed, these are not longer Start-ups, they need to switch to a subscription model or at least authenticate users to stop noise & abuse.
Define "failure". Reddit is still up. If you mean the "disappearance" of "free speech" you need to define that. When did it exactly end and why?
I don't know, you tell me since you are claiming Reddit "failed" ๐
It's not clear where the "force" is coming from.
And we judge such censorship as good, bad or indifferent. For Twitter? Well.....Censored.
What inexorable circumstances? Do you mean critical editorials? Protests? Loss of advertisers? Employees from the left (or right) quitting?
I think a lot of these problems can be solved by a subscription model / ownership by a $250+ billionaire who doesn’t care
As a past forum builder and moderator I can attest to just how difficult it can be even when dealing with a few hundred or a few thousand members.
There is something inherit in social networks that bring out the very worst in many.
It's not the networks it's the people 100%
You only care about your ability to sell ads, my man
Your thread is unexpectedly applicable to the agonizing process of parenting a twice exceptional (gifted and challenged) teenage boy.
Forced by inexorable circumstance = forced to censor stuff by the actual people "behind the scenes" with insane powers. Their mission started with free speech, but now they find themselves choosing between forced censoring or "things" may start happening to their friends & family
Agreed. The only missing brick in the reasoning (and an important one, as discovered in legal history) is being told why you are being censored and having the right to appeal. Basic principles of fair trail are often still missing from what has become the central agora.
Not exactly. Free speech / censorship resistance is a fundamental right. I think the issue here is concentrated power and the ethics associated with choosing to arbitrate potentially dangerous ideas / situations.
All this verbiage and still opaque about what is driving the censorship. “Why we do what we do is beyond your understanding, peon, but trust me, we're really torn up about it. I have to huff chamomile on my sabbaticals just to live with myself” is the short version of all of that
Can you explain why you think they are "forced by inexorable circumstance" to censor certain things?
What is your best example of a dangerous/powerful idea that needs to be censored by an authority?
Wanted to say thanks for sharing your thought in raw. If only we the people can be respectful and keep a door open to reconcile. Have you seen decentralised social? ๐ซ I guess that’s one way to remove the regulation of social in social network. Can’t stop toxicity or crime.
The disease in this rationale are the assumptions beneath “if you run”
a well designed “large social network” will “run itself”
“you” will begin and end at design
“inexorable circumstance” created by users can be defused only by users
when @birdwatch cannibalizes Twtr c. 2042
Hi Yishan,
you don’t know me and probably don’t have to care what I have to say but at least I can say it freely. First I want to thank you for your article. 1/6
In the beginning it’s all about left or right which may be because of the two big US parties, which can devide a country as there is no real inbetween and Twitter has an even broader international audience, who may see the world a little different.2/6
In my opinion the biggest issue is that people don’t take responsibility for their actions anymore neither for what they are saying nor what they are reading/watching, as everyone should just check the sources on their own or at least question them sometimes.3/6
Of course violence and cursing should be censored or at least age restricted and warned beforehand by the platform, but the viewer also has a responsibility as the one who posted it.4/6
And as long as you(not you specifically) don’t understand something(in this case the basics of web2.0), you shouldn’t use it and then just blame the creator for your irresponsibility.5/6
As always education is key. In the end we should be happy to have the possibility to speak freely and have people fighting for it as in some countries this isn’t possible at all.6/6
Most parents try to be fair - their children will often say things “are not fair!” Most siblings know they have the capacity to be cruel and even physically abusive. Most parents are two steps behind and only want peace and a nice dinner. This is the new internet. Let’s grow up!
This is a lie. There have been many instances of them censoring truthful facts that would shine a negative light on democrats.
In which way then?
When large groups disagree on the platform, how do they collapse the platform?
Operationally = technically?
How will arbitrarily, taking down a couple of large accounts, regardless of the facts, contribute? Or prevent real world, detrimental phenomenon?
…because Someone has designed an #algorithm which imposes THEIR choice on the conversation, and suddenly, boom - #censorship. #Shareholders #Elon
Man, I came to the valley to work with guys like YOU. But you seem to opt out about one thing: getting so rich so young is an issue. What does @elonmusk really want if not more money, more ‘power’, more ouya to his fever. It’s a price we, the users, pay and it’s not right.
Read entire thread. Here is the summary “well I ran Reddit and couldn’t do it, so nobody else — not even @elonmusk can do it!!!!”
Sorry bud, but you ain’t it.
You keep saying “politics”. Fuck your politics. Maybe you shouldn’t be in bed with IC and State Department? We aren’t all idiots. Good luck dealing with the upcoming consequences of your actions.
Again a perfect reason for a mind like @elonmusk to take over this. This may be a bigger issue which is worth Musk’s time than going to Mars.
One question to prove we can trust you. 100% of people who get this question wrong are ideological zombies. How many genders are there?
So this is support for the fact of political bias.
What were the “current politics” when Trump was in office? Aka political bias
Omg you are f. super. If i could tip you I would. Brilliant. Greetings from Sweden.
The problem is a product problem not a moral problem. The products are designed to massively amplify, which can have dire side effects. "OMG we put oil on the highways to help things go faster and idiots keep driving off the cliff!!"
Yes, ideas can be dangerous, but they are pretty innocuous when the village idiot can only reach his village. The product is designed to massively accelerate ALL ideas, without wondering if that's a good idea or acknowledging the volume of stupidity that we humans are capable of
Agreed -- apart from "always" (because you can't control what people are going to do)
Your job is not to control.
You can't control humans.
We have like thousands of years of human condition history.
Don't be obtuse.
Rude.. ideas are meant to be free. Basically you are saying they don't like radical ideas to spread. Figured as much. I am trying to spread some.
It's the dick pic problem... So many more exposures than IRL.
My god. This.
can you say something more concrete about this? I want to know some juicy inside example if you'd be kind enough to share
This is the key, but I think social media is at its best when it's dangerous. The promise of the old internet was exactly that it disaggregated power in ways that were powerful and dangerous. Platforms should stand behind it rather than re-accumulating power to themselves.
Obviously most will succumb, but if Elon pushes Twitter to hold out longer then it's all for the better.
But 95% of the times what they’re censoring are useless left vs right banter becoz a bunch of guys are reporting that tweet and not on merits of the tweet. That is the flaw - Platform taken over by mobs. It is easy to fix mobs without censorship- Trust &Identity. Prblm is not big
Also, free speech comes with responsibility. e.g. you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater. Or incite people to act violently. Brandenburg v. Ohio.
Explain how Trump's ideas and leadership were dangerous.
You can't, without choosing a political side.
I think this assertion needs more support. Conventional wisdom is ideas are borderline worthless. "Sticks and stones..."
"Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas."
Joseph Stalin
Well, hunter biden laptop was a big one that affected where we are today, with war and all… pretty big deal to censor something as factually accurate as that before an election.
So what? The platform is not responsible for the consequences of speech. Let ideas, powerful or not, to fly around freely. If people want to kill each other on the streets over them, so be it. It's not Twitter responsibility to prevent or avoid that.
that would make sense if the far left idea weren't running rampant without impunity
But isn't that one of the major reasons why @elonmusk is getting involved??
Twitter users are being indoctrinated into IDEAS & NARRATIVES that aren't necessarily aligned with the word TRUTH.
Partially true. There is a definite bias.
Ivermectin, masks were something to "control" you with, vaxes contain microchips, etc. All ideas.
News outlets used to be subject to standards.
Now, on social media ppl will die with no standards on this front, same as w/ hate speech directed at any group like Jews, gays, etc.
That's precisely why ideas need to be allowed to flourish or be criticised freely. There are many with great institutional power of all kinds with powerful and dangerous ideas too. Why be afraid of competing ideas if this is not the case?
maybe we should allow humans to be in danger more often and then we would have a bit more respect for the fragility of life and human relationships under duress
How would you determine which ideas are powerful and dangerous without applying your own views? You might be holding back an important change in society due to your personal meddling with the data.
Have you ever read Wired for Culture by Mark Pagel?
Elon is aware of the latter which is why he wanted to make it a private company to fix the core problem. He has enough money so he can fend off all the various lawsuits that are inevitably coming at anyone that dares to be a platform for unpopular opinions.
It's not the power of ideas, but the power of pathology and pain. This is what a social network should fight, not ideas.
Yeeeeah they are
Allowing ideas that conform to only one way of thinking is even more dangerous
That's exactly why there should be absolutely no censorship on a "platform".
What are those issues? Isn’t a simple solution to just not censor anything except threats/incitement of violence, and anything illegal?
That doesn't sound simple at all
Simpler than trying to enforce arbitrary principles for what is and isn’t allowed
"Threats/incitement of violence, and anything illegal" is not cut in stone. That's both very much up for interpretation and it also depends entirely on the laws of many different countries. It's never just that simple, when the scale is pretty much the entire planet.
I guess, but at the moment they (I assume) already try to remove illegal things plus a load more things that are against their terms of service. My proposal is dumping the TOS stuff and stick to illegality only.
Please, expound the operational issue(s) that necessitate censorship
to be clear, the operational issues that are independent of the ideas that end up being censored
Can you elaborate on the “operational issues?” It’s hard for this user to understand how, for example, some shitty people talking about topic X (lab leak for example) means that ALL discussion of topic X must be banned for the good of the network.
Spoken like someone who has truly operated at a level few comprehend
It humans that disagree with whatever "absolute truth" agenda the corpos and media subscribe to. And by subscribe to I mean author.
Yishan, great thread. Was wondering if you had examples of these sorts of topics and behaviors that force people’s hands?
I'm open to the idea that this is true, but I'm having trouble imagining how it is. You're saying that it's true, not showing that it's true. What terrible thing would have happened if, say, the lab leak hypothesis went uncensored, or the Hunter Biden laptop story, etc.?
People would have been shitty to each other on a massive scale, but so what? I'm too naive to see why this "forces" social media networks to intervene.
Disagree in theory, though in practice it may be true.
I’d think with substantial pain experienced, eventually, community leaders will be formed and lead and sub communities will develop moral code to coexist — roughly as well as we do in physical planet.
You can't ignore chasing the money either. They didn't simply buckle, they saw how best to maximise their market share and profits.
Financial pressures drive a LOT of censorship.
What about Telegram?
reminds me of what @fr_brennan has said about 8chan in interviews.
Every search engine tried to rank search results as accurately as possible they buckled, then came Google. You were a moderator at Reddit, of course this is the way you see the world. You're no Larry Page, let @elonmusk do his thing, no doubt he can make Twitter ๐ฏ better.
Also, recommendation algorithms by definition are censorious. Any platform that filters information is making amplification decisions constantly. So given that social platforms have no choice but to be in that business, the best thing they can do is be reasonable.
"not by governments"
Ridiculous. We know for a fact that the US government has been active in nudging tech oligarch's into anti-free speech compliance, at many different levels, both overt and covert. I can't believe you would so quickly dismiss that. It taints the entire thread
I like the idea of a zero censorship free for all, but authenticating users is tantamount. Like, registering is a bit of a pain in the ass. You need to provide your social security # and some check stubs. Kind of like getting food stamps.
By what mechanism exactly do the "emergent dynamics" "force" it? I thought social networks buckle to censorship b/c of concrete commercial or legal risk, e.g. public opinion turning away users or facing liability. ISPs have legal protection, why not social networks?
I don't understand this statement. Are you forced to censor for operational reasons like infrastructure or network limitations?
Tilting censorship towards one ideology is as dangerous as anything that preceded the evil of the twentieth century
Accreditation for propagandists, like @PolitiFact and @mmfa…is paving the path to hell
Half the country is being demonised & ignored
How do you think that ends?
Nah. From Twitter trash talk to actually burning down cities, there is a chasm, which can only be bridged by systematically funded organizations. Imagine Elon shouts “burn down the Capitol Hill!” on Twitter, nobody will take action. If you disagree, again, please name one example
What if I design a platform that will disallow me (or anyone else) to censor anything?
Where, by design, general censorship is impossible?
So far you have made almost no point in this long as fuck thread.
In fact here’s a good example. Literally as I hit “reply” with this tweet I had to be told “most users don’t talk like this” and had to hit “reply anyway”. It’s bullshit and you know it. Death to twitter long live the new flesh.
Really a great thread overall, and this part specifically reminds me of the discussions I've heard and read from old MUD ops and early gaming communities, stuff @raphkoster has talked about a lot in community building and online social dynamics.
I disagree here. The problem with social networks was not the emergent behaviour. It was the desire to create a centralised network. Without it things are very different
To see the impact, look at difference in spam handling between email and WhatsApp / SMS. Email is decentralised, spam sucks and you cannot complain to anyone. Most detection/prevention is at receiver level. Nobody thinks it is a potential free speech problem.
Look at WhatsApp/SMS. FB / govt take the 'responsibility' to eliminate spam. Most prevention is at source level via content moderation (templates, URL whitelisting). Once you have content moderation, censorship creeps in - a centralised institution is very vulnerable to activism.
Worth remembering the Council of Europe new notion of media (@coe no longer #Europe47 now #Europe46) (I’ll also mention it at the top of this excellent thread) #NewNotionOfMedia #NNoM
search.coe.int/cm/Pages/resul…
I don’t think this is true at all.
Here comes the rationalization…. People with this mentality run these networks don’t forget that. They really believe this shit makes it “necessary” to censor. But don’t worry, it’s good apparently.
You clearly have not been paying attention to what is happening in the scientific area regarding this all @parsifalar is a perfect example so everything U SAID U could acquiesce & put it in a balloon & let it go up cuz that's where it belongs.
@elonmusk LET THY HUE SHINE
Could have fooled me
“moderation” and “censorship” are subtly very distinct things. A free for all platform without any moderation unravels into nasty chaos. “Moderation” privilege can certainly be abused into “censorship” with an agenda. The most ancient problem hasn’t found a modem solution yet
On its face, your thread is a justification for censorship. You said outright that certain ideas can be harmful and must be suppressed. Odd how you don’t own it now. I see what all you’re trying to say in your thread but I disagree wholeheartedly.
The past couple years of Twitter have been the worst ever. Twitter was much better before they decided to act on suppressing its users.
Twitter is better when people get to speak their mind without a moderator. Some of its best users have been silenced in some form. It’s becoming a place for the left to smell their own farts and it’s even getting stale to them. Fairness is good but that’s not happening anymore.
You actually said social media companies are justified to find and prevent behaviours that could hypothetically influence people to break laws (rather than behaviour that actually breaks laws). (Your lightning rod anology.) How is that not censorship?
Good ๐งต! But I think you’ve focused on “religious” talks as a main factor when in reality that kinda ended in the late 90s! Social topics is where FoS becomes a hot topic. Gender equality & orientation, women’s rights & equal pay, BLM vs ALM, LGB(T)Q vs Sports…
i take your point on civil discourse but man, running reddit really turned your brain into mush to think twitter is primarily censoring topics based on the level on civil conversation taking place. take a look at literally any other topic to see that's not true
Gosh man. Put down the kool aid. Musk is a crook. He is not here to fix anything. Gosh he cancels out many ppl himself who speak against Tesla. Whistleblowers are swatted , critics harassed. Musk is just trying to control Twitter as that’s how he manipulates his stock price.
Desalination. Cool stuff. Nice resource for sodium, too. Couse next big thing in battery stuff for example is sodium-ion-batteries. Reach out to @MaxFichtner for more about this topic. Plus, you don't have to put the brine back to the ocean if you're not interested to the salt.
The fact that you see water as The Next Big Thing to capitalise and exploit might explain why ‘tech titan’ mentality is bad for us and for you.
Oh hey, forgot that was you. I might be getting one of those things. ๐๐ป
Thank you for this eye-opening thread!
Yes! Interested.
All you've done here is show you're part of the problem and blind to it
I love this!
That’s incredible.
Saving seeds is a great idea, if the soil quality doesn't collapse. Please check out the amazing work in Regenerative Ag that's actively rebuilding soil quality NOW - re-greening the Chihuahuan Desert & restoring grasslands globally.
Support Holistic Management & Regenerative Agriculture | Savory Institute
We're a Global Movement of RegenerativeFarmers & Land ManagersOur NetworkConscientiousConsumers & BrandsLand to MarketCommittedChampions &
savory.global
Love your project. How will you amend the soil, which is depleting fast around the world.
Phenomenal thread
Thank you for sharing!
๐
Wordcel proving he has zero idea how the world works
Free speech/marketplace of ideas has conclusively ALWAYS been the best approach. But NOW is different b/c TOO MUCH?
People fight for power and control of resources via money, govt & politics. Ignore that. It’s peons bitching.
Yo, #BasicPrinciples just add a "tag as [name of fallacy]" feature, and that'll fix lots of silly arguments
@elonmusk
Don't remove upon tagging, just show how many people tagged a post as "ad hominem" or "strawman".
Indeed, even though Twitter has a lot to be fixed as a public company and as a social media, I’d rather have @elonmusk working on real things such as EVs and space
thank you very much for these posts. The one question i have left is: what person should?
The motherfuckers got billions to make himself feel better, he's spending billions just so he can buy a new toy
Hey dude there’s actually Real Atom work harder than planting trees
Open source would help
Yall scared thats what the real deal is.
Twitter probably has a bigger impact on the Real Atoms than you want to admit.
Not once did I see you say that censorship should be their to stop misinformation and lying on social media.
<ignores actual thread topic, picks up on the aside, because well just because>
Have you also looked into regenerative farming techniques? Seems to me they have huge carbon sink potential.
It's amazing how many rich dudes walk off into the sunset with their money claiming things are too hard.
The actual lesson is the failure to build and scale a thinking organization, but then the current incentives are tied to rewarding functional dark triangle behavior.
That's interesting. Have you heard of Ten Billion Tree Tsunami project?
Curious about @elonmusk's view on forest restoration as a means to fight climate change?
I would happily give my remaining life to a project like this. I happen to have two degrees in Forestry, and am married to a botanist. Where do I apply?
I love this idea! I'm an IT guy (for over 35 years), but I would love to be involved in something like this. Well done.
Eh, id say it's cause the internet became accessible to everyone instead of just the more technically literate (and on average slightly more mature.. maybe) crowd. And the less technically literate tend to be crybabies.
There was a time the greater internet fucked theory felt so true. Then we removed anonymity and it turns out some people are just fuckwads
you and this guy should have a few beers this weekend. figure this all out. we don't want Titter to fuck your work on SpaceX & Tesla - sincerely, a fan
The "great promise" of the old internet was that it could give a voice to the voiceless and… then we realized that that's not always a good thing.
I’m still wondering here if ur just naive enough or desperatey wanna believe in yer own eristic to assume that the man who created paypal didnt know bout BTC rather than having waited to shill it to the mass. I mean… u can’t be serious, honestly.
Yes it is
*sigh* it's so sad; there was so much promise and hope there.
Ever heard of just ignoring shฤฑt? Yeah ignore whiners. That's another thing we did in the '90s.
bro I am so lost but the length of this thread you coulda wrote a book. how much time you got on your hands to write the thread…imagine. all the ppl harrassing other ppl too got too much time on their hands
u rich ain’t you ๐๐ง๐
my man got so much time writing a long thread you must be sportin like 16 rolexes
Random tidbit about Dick Costolo's tenure as CEO... Costolo is a major booster for @UMichFootball, which makes him subject to certain NCAA rules. Michigan once had to self-report a violation of those rules because Costolo tweeted at a recruit (which he's not allowed to do).
So the CEO of Twitter caused @UMichFootball to commit an NCAA violation... over Twitter. ๐คฃ
***TWEET OF THE WEEK AWARD***
I rly think there just needs to be a No Asshole rule/required agreement on social media. And it will be very funny implementing it. Ie, if anyone's mean on Twitter, they get an ai counselor until nice again
I personally find it hugely fun to be polite & anonymous on social media
And if we're seeing tons of anonymous hateful comments online, it's bec ppl are hurting & rly need a therapist & using social media as unofficial therapist to get out nastiness inside.
->Social media might work well as medium to purge emotional bile.
Huge opportunity to improve mindset of humanity here. Screw free speech, let's get everybody healthy 1st.
& actually, democracy won't last w/o a society of *healthy minds* speaking freely
Free speech for, say, a nation of mentally hateful ppl, will lead to a form of gov where a power-hungry bad guy will abuse society of mentally weak people for self-gain
God bless you here, Elon
Shaking my head. True true….
The generalization ๐ If I am gonna be accused of the crime then I may as well commit it and go off and be horrible ???
That Ellen Pai shit was fucked up
And now reddit bans subreddits at the drop of a hat. Fatpeoplehate must have looked like an Omega event but then staff would have realized that school holidays just needed to end.
She is married to a gay conman sexual harasser fraudster. Reddit is the least of her problems.
Ellen Pao was a saint. As a regular Reddit user, I wish we could have her back.
Ellen Pao had Reddit threads removed that called out her litigation and loss against Kleiner Perkins. She directly benefited from censorship and an abuse of corporate power. She was overly controlling over her image and is a very poor example of someone who should be pitied.
Exactly. It was at this very point in the thread that I realised it would have to be parody.
An yes Ellen Pao, a famous example of CEOs not caring about politics ๐๐คฆโ๏ธ
well, well, well, if it isn’t the consequences…
Behavior shouldn’t be policed
I really liked this until you started praising @jack. That fake guru tilted an election for his political beliefs and admitted it. He deserves to be remembered as the guy who founded Twitter and got kicked out of it despite his service to the regime. He should enjoy his billions.
Why the fuck not? I love this thread and respect your perspective but the consequences of Elon's failures are not failure for society. Even if it means less electric cars and less billionaires in space (neither of which are triumphs for society). Corporations are expendable.
This thread doesn’t recall history very accurately.
Very long drawn out crock of bullshit.
What a fucking tool. Imagine excusing truth being censored because the discourse offended your sensibilities. Enjoy virginity.
Wow, you just called out and judged someone else's emotional psyche after talking about people behaving badly on the internet without civil discourse?
Your bias is now boldly shining through ...
Man Shows his emotions = Emotionally Damaged.
^ That's an absurd, incorrect statement from an emotionally repressed man.
In other words: yell your lungs out. @elonmusk is sick and dangerous. But thanks for the thread.
Leapin' lizards, Sandy!
This was an very informative thread. But, the things u stated is what @elonmusk already has battled. Being the wealthiest comes with these problems & expectations & then some. Can u imagine corporations asking u to end World Hunger? While u bring foreign ideals/inventions to life
Great move. Call an Asperger’s patient, that became the wealthiest person on the planet, emotionally damaged. The Left 101.
Ok what are your thoughts on this? Sounds like you probably have a left wing bias tbh.
Great points.
idk man if they’re the workaholic type then it probably doesn’t make much difference to just pile a little bit more on
You’re not the only one bewildered by this focus on Twitter or social media. As one of my anthropology professors said to me, “human behaviour is messy”
What puzzles me: with all those $billions to spend, why Twitter of all things? He loves space flight so why not instead build a great cosmology/physics institute with a Texas U, or new telescope, an institute for our @TXMedCenter or expand STEM education?
Elon Musk wants to buy Twitter, make it 'maximally trusted'
In 10 days, Tesla CEO Elon Musk has gone from popular Twitter contributor and critic to...
houstonchronicle.com
Not sure the world needs SpaceX or Tesla anymore except as competitive milestones (Tesla getting Big Auto to go green is it's biggest contribution IMO). But this thread is ๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ฅ
Well done.
Damage his psyche eve more.
He has dealt with much worse.
Your pessimism is showing!
Free speech and leave people tf alone. Easy. Done.
I think every person on social media should be required to take a "manners class" to join. Then, anyone who breaks their manners gets a message telling them to "BE NICE" and a req to retake "manners class" + req video chat w ai to pass "manners test" before rejoining. Haha ๐
I completely have the same thought.. Controlling behaviour of 5 people is difficult.. This is about millions...
๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ ๐ฏ
Are you imagining @elonmusk sitting in front of his Twitter clicking on approve/reject button on every tweet? I really think your world view of how the business world works has been scared by your days as moderator of Reddit. Or are you applying to the role in disguise?
He’s already irrecoverably damaged in legacy.
why you are worrying about his psyche bro he doesn’t even worry about his own psyche obviously since he regularly has sleep deprivation and Cannot imagine sleeping alone ever at all?
that’s what happens when you have too much money, a astronomical ego and zero talent or actual knowledge.
Elon seems to orient his life around huge goals (make humans a multi-planetary species, replace all gasoline cars in the world with electric), how will he manage in the social media world where there is seemingly no end goal? It just the continued management of user frustrations.
This seems a bit narcissistic to conclude, no?
I'd be pretty interested in knowing which part of Elon's current reflexions would yield to more problems. Limited-time edits, time outs instead of perma bans, ending bot spam/crypto scam, moderation & content pushing algo transparency are long overdue.
๐คก
Says you…
Your opinion, Is this why he is filthy rich? He can only improve this trashy social media platform. This all begs
the the question, what use is this platform anyway?, what does it produce?, what real value is it. It would be like buying the Brooklyn bridge
This is a outstanding thread. Great post
Do you have titan “away days”?
"All the tech titans are buddies". That's also the problem; they're a cabal, with a very leftist, globalist view of the world. Where's the diversity of thought?
Yesterday was a flagship day in corporate media. It was the day they were forced to explicitly state what has long been clear: they not only favor censorship but desperately crave and depend on it.
Even if Musk doesn't buy Twitter, never forget what yesterday revealed.
would be a great addition to the squad
Musk has fixed hard problems. Maybe he will come up with something on this too
You keep Jack did a good job. What’s an example?
Keep saying*
That you, @profgalloway? ๐
To be clear: I'm pretty well convinced that $TWTR is insufficiently monetized, so the reasons for asking @jack to step aside as a capitalist may outweigh the assessment that he's managing shitty human behavior well.
have you at least read what jack twitted few weeks ago bout his regrets on merging social media and big corporates like black rock?
You have very valid points. But suggesting that any “board” or “person” is given the right to determine “bad” behavior, is where down to the core actual ethics comes into play. Who chooses where to draw the line, and who is allowed to play “god” when it comes to “bad” and “good”
Unfortunately throughout history some things need to happen in order for society to get an actual grasp and understand what’s going on around them. This all stems from the trust the government in the US has lost in its people over the last 20-30 years.
Tech thinking they need to shackle the commoners to the floorboards while the first, second, and fourth estate have a big orgy is EXACTLY the problem Musk is pointing out. "Misbehavior" is Duke putting on a buffalo hat and stealing podia but not big corps killing thousands.
You have been reading Schopenhauer lol. You are right.
Authentic question: does the intentional spreading of lies and misinformation count as ‘misbehaving’ in your algorithm? Even if one is being civil in their delivery, ‘fake news’ is harmful as well. Just curious on your take…
"when there are no immediately visible consequences", This is the root cause of the behavior (not topic) problem, which is in reality an incentive structure problem, and Elon's a genius at establishing incentive structures (youtu.be/sp8smJFaKYE?t=…).
RAW Elon Musk Interview from Air Warfare Symposium 2020
2020 Air Warfare Symposium Fireside Chat with Elon Musk, Chief executive officer of Space Exploration Technologies Corp (SpaceX).AFA's Air Warfare Symposium ...
youtube.com
Yes!!!
Which is why I posit that #Identity #Authenticity lies at the core of the problem re #socialmedia platforms. By that I mean the full spectrum of nuances associated with identity i.e., all the "nyms" rather than some mythical canonical identity pegged to one identifier.
The fundamental reasoning behind the notion of a #SemanticWeb was all about the fact that anyone could say anything about anything. Thus, it was vital that the concept of using a #hyperlink as a denotation tool extended beyond documents to any thing humanly imaginable.
Net effect, you end up with a #hypermedia realm where entities (things) and their relations (or links) to other entities become both accessible and computable using the human mind and/or a variety of programming languages.
#Web20 doesn't understand or care about any of this.
Neither does #Web3.
The #hypermedia realm I describe enables the use of agent profiles and content #metadata to provide a richer substrate for computation informed by #reasoning and #inference. Basically, #ExplainableAI rather than #BlackBoxAI (which was always DOA).
unroll.
That, and, more importantly, there is an echo-chamber that encourages anger and victimhood. Anger draws ratings, viewers, eyeballs, etc. They've decided that explaining the gray areas is boring so they the stoke the lizard brain. A feature not a bug.
It leads to an audience of angry, psychotic nuts who will, I dunno, try to overrun the Capitol.
We need real fucking men to be running shit, not fucking wet wipes
Agreed
Hard disagree on this.
While I don't blame @jack himself, there is a clear political bias in twitter moderation and it was on full display in this conversation with Vijaya Gadde.
Tim Pool Tells Twitter Exec They Have a Liberal Bias | JRE Twitter Special
Taken from Joe Rogan Experience #1258 w/Jack Dorsey, Vijaya Gadde, and Tim Pool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZCBRHOg3PQ
youtube.com
First there was chaos. Then rules. Then being “nice”, then…
you're exactly the sort of person I would expect to have his lips fastened to a tech billionaire's ass
No he was pretty much doing the same if not more when he resigned as CEO back in early 2010's.
That's NOT why he fasts and meditates and goes on spiritual retreats.
Control Twitter, accelerate Space X. The prevailing narrative is identity politics where ‘experience’ is valued over evidence. Pro-science problem/solution thinking produces tangible, societal and technological progress.
People are a-holes. Social media reflects that fact.
I agree with this 100%, he kept it simple, and didn't add too much emotion to the interactions.
Thank you @jack you really did something special, no matter what
Sounds like a copout to me.
Aww @jack he likes you ๐
Agreed in full. Twitter always had nominal terms of service (TOS) but in the earlier years was focused on growth and tended to wink at them. Once they began enforcing them, Twitter vastly improved.
Recall the time Milo Yiannopoulos set his hordes to attack Leslie Jones.
I mean... I wouldn't say he ran the company fiduciarilly in the way a "world class CEO" would.
But obviously I don't give a shit about Twitters profitability, so from my perspective, I'm happy that he ran it like it did. Twitter is more than a company, or are least it should be
Where you see Jack, it’s a general manager who ran Twitter in one of the many incarnations of Twitter’s corporate structure in Jack’s tenure. That GM left Twitter years before Dorsey, but cast a long, mikshake-shaped shadow, and things went really well for some time.
Trump will return, get over it
There you prove your bias. Twitter poll by Elon proves you wrong. 2 milion people a 70% majority found twitter cencorship unfair and dumb. Why did youtube remove dislike button? It did not stop any bad behaviour.
You have some great points, but 10 years ago I could build a bubble for things I was interested in in twitter, now I get friends' liked posts, and other "you might be interested in" posts in my feed from people i don't follow. This amplifies reactions to "non civil" posts.
So no accountability for people that do bad things when they hear something they think is true?
This is a big, paternalistic assumption. Why do you have this belief? Maybe humans behave badly regardless, but worse when censored. Have you tried doing nothing and found it *net* worse? The primary anti-censorship argument is that the "cure" is worse than the disease.
All of this leads to the stance that porn and shooters should be banned, not because of the content, but because some humans when confronted with that content, act it out in real life with real world consequences. I ASSURE YOU
The problem here is that if you define "bad behavior", there is zero space for calling what you do avoiding incivility. It's taking a value-based stance, always
A tremendous contextual thread w clarity on underlying human dynamics!
In designing group / community change initiatives I architect "skin in the game" into the structure:
There's segmentation lag to behaviors & good examples w feedback can drive ~99% +follow-on & -mitigation.
So, if we're Americans, seeing the Woke Communist agenda come to fruition, our elections physically manipulated, and our institutions hijacked, we cannot just do NOTHING right?
Yet that is what you'd argue is necessary, to prevent impoliteness.
Trump was banned for his politics
TL;DR: I ran Reddit so I think I understand internet, politics and culture. But I’m really just a lost collectivist trying to rationalize things inside my bubble of cognitive dissonance.
All other things constant, perhaps. But who says all things are constant? In fact, they rarely are. Change is inevitable. Accountability changes the entire equation and ecosystem. People behave much differently when they cannot hide behind a fake handle.
You totally lost me here.
So punishing truthtellers is better for humanity sometimes…..but only when certain people see fit. They didn’t silence ideas everywhere, just from one platform. It doesn’t cancel anything about the people that believe it, they just made the twitter echo chamber happy
Disagree. It's not the role of a platform to censor discussion of ideas because of possible real world actions. Actions are separate; they're not your responsibility. We have police for that.
You sound so convinced. It’s hubris to think that anyone knows what is best for everyone. The problem with a heavy handed censorship on platforms is that you have to be right. Last time I checked, nobody is that perfect.
Freedom is not perfect, but it’s the best we got.
Yup. The only thing more dangerous than freedom is not-freedom
This (yours) is the dangerous idea. Ironic.
Leftists/neocons are mad that they lose debates all the time and their ideas are not competitive without silencing their opposition. Thats what tech censorship is really about and really motivated by, not this thread trying to come up with a convoluted, nuanced explanation.
What is behaving badly?when ? If lab leak is REAL , and it will cause violence and spread, does media has right to censor it? It is TRUE. Just saying. This is the problem.
And why do I see 10 comments in section but i look inside only 4 are visible.
So Big Tech does nothing about the Russia collusion bs and other stories harmful to the right for years, but needs to act if it’s a story damaging to the left? I’m sorry but your take doesn’t hold water or else it wouldn’t be so one-sided
Incorrect
This is physics. If the oligarchy misbehaves, there needs to be a reaction in order for the nation-state to persist. Accountability works differently in the real world. Control of information is control of culture. It corrupts a living system of checks and balances
"behaving badly" is a perfect phrase to use if you desire to take arbitrary amounts of self-justifying, corrective power over someone else
Let them
Or make it worse by trying to censor
Define "badly"
If 1 human can behave well, logically all can.
Let people fight to this end freely on a platform that informs them accurately how liked or disliked their views are. This will curb the extremes a little.
Twitter doesn't offer a balancing act.
But then I am naive
And who control those who run the media and spread disinformation to influence the masses? We do and at certain times we cannot do nothing either. Censorship isn’t democratic. Either ppl are good enough for a full debate, either they let others have it. No censorship needed.
Are you God? Why do you get to decide what is "Behaving badly", why are YOU the holder of truth? This thread is bullshit. Cencoring is not due to bad behaviour. It is to re-enforce the state approved narratives. Banning Trump had no effect on anybodys behaviour on twitter.
those humans can get blocked by other humans and learn that they get blocked if they behave badly (and also sometimes blocked for reasons beyond their control just because their content is triggering to some although completely fine for others)
And this is one of the most common authoritarian excuses: "We know better than you what, when, how and if something can be discussed. It's for your own good. We know better."
“humans will continue behaving badly” this mentality is why everyone us so keen for elon to purge the whole lot
Yeah Chinese virus racist, Indian virus kosher, all without bias. Pull the other one !
Agree GenX cared about free speech as abstract value (and others largely don't), but as social media became ~all of culture, regulation has become a tactical political battleground far more than you accept here, esp post-2016. Covid discourse was censored from external pressure.
Younger, you mean? But also boomers, yes. Actually the right thing is probably to expose people to tiny highly-local internet among family members/friends/school first before broader internet, for a while, then link to a small number of external peers, then meet those peers IRL.
But especially agree with conclusion that Elon getting infected by running a social media site would be bad for him, and SpaceX, and thus humanity (and that Jack did a good job; my issues are with the next 2-3 tiers of Twitter staff). Hopefully he delegates 100%.
The ideal thing would be if he set up a blind trust/etc. to own it. Especially possible if somehow he only throws in $1-5B of his own (which he probably COULD donate) and external funding for the rest.
He touches it he owns it forever.
I think the financial investment for him w.r.t. Twitter is product innovation, specifically around crypto.
The *real* question here is "what could Elon do which would most break the simulation" -- maybe he should do a 4chan/8ch/DA/FA rollup.
I was with you up to a point, but this simply is not true. Yes, the censorship/suppression/amplification is not purely anti-left or anti-right, but it does pertain to -content-, not just bad behavior. Man, we've all seen it 1000x, someone trying to discuss an idea calmly, & being
Had the same thought when I was reading through this thread and got to this tweet.
2/ zapped/banned, or slapped with 'disinfo' labels, accounts banned just for who they follow in ban sweeps, etc. They let ideologue groups tell them what to filter.
'No one can talk about Hunter's laptop or disagree w/ Fauci/CDC, here's some 'trending hashtags but we zapped a
3/ few we dislike, haha. -We have seen it 1000x-.
We can already block/mute. We do not need nannytech 'adjudicating disputes' or enforcing 'civility'. We never did.
Who elected this goofball to decide who can be heard?
Twitter CEO: “Most people can speak but our role which is particularly emphasised is WHO can be heard.”
Is this admission to the chilling effect of throttling and shadow-banning accounts?
My account loses about 100-200 followers, daily.
twitter.com/AKA_RealDirty/…
Cool explain why we couldn’t link to NYP article about Biden laptop in DMs around election, and explain harder why a sitting US Pres was de-platformed, and obvious conservative satire is tagged “misinformation”—but bias is all in my imagination.
Honest question: Do you think this is the same reason the social networks shut down the NYPost Hunter Biden story before the election? Or do you think that move might have been 'preemtive' to head off *potential* rancor and maybe violence?
if you're so sure, why don't you try responding to every person bringing up the holocaust that it wasnt 6 million and that the camps in the west weren't death camps. both uncontroversial facts that most orthodox historians accept.
I don’t think this holds up across the board no matter the political affiliation of the topic involved. I think you are doing your best to boil this down to a simple user behavior problem but it is much more complex than that. It’s a company policy and structure issue imo
You don't address the immense manipulation by those seeking to profit. Politically. Financially. Those manipulations drive discourse.
Also, isn't describing his relationships with the mothers of his kids as "fucking actresses/singers" a bit insulting?
Now do the Laptop from Hell.
Perhaps not the best forum to expound upon, but you can’t expect “i assure you” to convince any skeptic. If you want your argument to be taken seriously you’ll need to provide convincing evidence. If not here, then elsewhere.
So tell me jackass- what happens when the scientists have all been bought and paid for by the government- and there is an agenda they are protecting? You are so wrong in so many ways
If have to disagree and point to the New York post story on hunter Biden.
Why not shut down Twitter altogether and ask go to Nature to share ideas?
It's bizarre the idea that just some people can discuss something, specially a conspiracy theory that was spot on right! There's ample evidence of why scientists didn't publish: conflicts of interest.
It can't be rationally discussed because there is no evidence - that's the point
Ok but you could create a blue/orange or whatever color you want approval if you are a serious epidemiologist. They were censor also
You’re talking about one side that you’ve seen on Twitter. There’s actually been tons of real talk about the origin of the virus from people like @K_G_Andersen @angie_rasmussen @EricTopol and many others. There is a signal to noise ratio that is important.
This is a flawed argument bcz even scientists and scientific community didn't discuss it outside of Twitter for quite a while and many were dismissed without considering or weighing the evidences properly. So my question is why did this happen outside of Twitter bubble?
Ofc this is not what happened, because instead of educating children about weaknesses of human brain (like confirmation bias), about scientific evidence vs anecdotal, about evidence based debate, we're teaching them stuff they won't ever need. Bans are workaround, not a solution.
Everyone can discuss any topic.
It *couldn't* be discussed in an "evidenced-based" manner because the media -lords and their political masters decided it wasn't the narrative that would advance the agenda. Trump needed to be the enemy at the time, not the CCP.
It has been debated on by scientists, just not on twitter, but on channels which are used by scientists and which are shielded from all the hate spewing mob you find on social networks.
so you want a situation where china for example can be uncivil, motivate anger and incivility and thereby bury a story.
True: people on BOTH sides of this issue—and pretty much any issue; this issue considerably less than many—behaved obnoxiously. When Twitter has its finger on one side of the scales, obnoxious behaviour does not explain which side of the scales it chooses
This “censorship” spilled into academia. This is a disingenuous and elitist argument. Your colleagues implemented a solution for which the consequences prevented the success of the hunt for patient zero. It enabled an oligarchic coup d’etat of the political narrative.
One of the people who did painstaking work in uncovering the lab leak, is an anonymous person from India, @TheSeeker268. May not be a scientist.
But why does it need to be scientists?
It couldn't happen. Because it was being censored, fueling frustration, anger, scepticism, mistrust, and conspiracy theories
The guy that created the mRNA tech got banned for discussing mRNA in covid vaccines. How much expertise should by required to be allowed “free speech” ?
In fact, this IS what was happening. Rational, civil discourse was censored.
I was willing to accept the premise of your thread in good faith until I arrived at this part. Patently false.
Yes the source is very important before sharing a tweet...
It's unacceptable for you to think that anyone can omnisciently determine which ideas are acceptable and which are dangerous. Full stop.
This thread is really enlightening, even from the angle of someone who lives in an authoritarian country, where ideas are powerful, thinking is dangerous and therefore banned, social media is in total control and full of monitoring and orthodox ideology and bullshit.
BLM was torching cities as FAANG was donating billions.
Agreed ๐ ๐
It's fine to highlight that nuance, as long as it's not used to draw an incorrect conclusion that "speech is violence".
“You (say) law is above freedom of utterance.. I reply.. you can have no wise laws.. unless there is free expression of the wisdom of the people & alas, their folly with it. But if there is freedom, folly will die of its own poison & wisdom will survive.”
William Allen White
This is really gob smackingly wrong. Are you saying the hunter Biden story was rabble rousing and dangerous?
Who decides?
The pen..is mightier than the sword
Thank you for trying to keep us civil. Social media proves we’re still just vicious monkeys.
If it were true that incitement of offsite violence, property destruction, etc. motivated the banning of the lab leak theory, then hysterical BLM related posts would have been banned too. But they weren’t.
You're arguing that people talking about the lab leak hypothesis on the internet was dangerous content that required censorship. You even wrote dangerous in all caps to emphasize how scary it is for people to be talking about forbidden subjects. You were born to be a slave.
I will never blur the line between ideas and physical violence. And I will never engage in physical violence. And I'm near certain that addressing physical violence as such addresses the issue.
If I didn't believe that, I would be actively hunting and killing Socialists.
Shut up, people were bored sitting on their arse lockdown at home... Its not your responsibility. The telephone company is not responsible for what people say....?
equating speech to harm is textbook woke propaganda.
Of course ideas can be dangerous, but everyone will have a different definition of what is defined as dangerous, this can easily be manipulated by any particular ideology or group and that is the most dangerous thing of all.
This is precisely how Putin uses speak today
A clear definition of hate speech or speech with harmful intent (ie, lies to manipulate,
inciting harm/violence, etc) needs to be defined, implemented.
Freedom of speech really is freedom to speak "well" "wisely" "helpfully" etc
I think it may be hard, but impt to try
Which is why we need ideas to flourish. The more we talk the more deep it gets.
By this same logic Floyd George story should have been suppressed, no? Cities burned and people died. Now while your argument in the abstract may be correct, you do not acknowledge that "safety" is not an objectively used criterion, but a politically motivated one.
You’re just redirecting the danger into an echo chamber instead of amplifying the discord into actionable revolution. How will a corrupt political class be usurped if you impose restrictions on dissenting behavior?
No it's not. It is what people do with them that can be dangerous. Those behaviors are usually pathological in nature, because some of our culture is pathogenic. We need it to change. Censorship prevents this change.
The power to censor whatever you want is more dangerous. Donald Trump tried to censor the EXISTENCE of the virus, as fake news and a hoax.
Censorship is a very dangerous idea, particularly when its inevitability is presumed
Like shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre is free speech, right?
We absolutely do not need to accept that speech leads to violence. People being allowed to use vibrations in their inner ear to excuse loss of composure is the problem. If someone yells fire in a crowded theater, and you go ape shit and trample a 6 year old, you are the ass hole
Speech is only as dangerous as the person speaking it. But it’s part of FREEDOM. It comes with the territory. Just like the 2nd amendment. Some people are gonna do some terrible things with that right. But it comes with the territory. Gotta let it ride.
I don't understand your message. If ideas are so powerful, it's not just behaviour that social medias want to moderate. They also want to moderate ideas and steer the public discourse, because, in a functioning democracy, where the public discourse goes, there goes lawmaking
This is the main FEATURE of free speech. This notion of "well speech may lead to violence so we can't have that" misses the point. Humans have had that throughout history. You don't protect speech to allow the sharing of nana's recipes.
In the past two months I've seen the open sharing of how to make improvised weapons in Ukraine, and Twitter doesn't care at all EVERYONE supports violence when it's politically aligned, even when guaranteed to cause harm.
This is “short skirt theory”
Blaming the behavior on a thing, then banning the thing or the people who wear/say the thing.
This is the kind of idiocy that bans high schoolers wearing shorts or tank tops because boys “can’t control themselves”
Don’t act like this idiocy is ok
You can tell a lot about our regime by which violence they allow, encourage, fundraise for, spin, and even promote on primetime television. Versus which peaceful groups were banned for being “dangerous”
Are you saying there's no way to minimize bad behavior around a lightning-rod topic without banning the entire topic?
Is it impossible for moderation to be based on the *quality* of discourse rather than the content?
Could there be a market in content moderation/recommendation separate from the communication platform?
This is an important point. I do feel the "town square" analogy really doesn't hold with social networks because these networks can mobilize a large number of people to action very quickly, making them fundamentally different from the "town square."
The story was true and the censorship of the topic likely wasted time and resources of researchers trying to develop solutions.
It's no longer censored because the official story lost credibility and pressure from above diminished. Ideas do not have moral agency, people do
And that is essential to the course of the development of #culture.
If you omit the negative consequences of ideas, you do not permit the culture of a people to develop guardrails and meta-level reflexes about those kinds of ideas.
You are acting like everyone is shortsighted about this because there could be real consequences and real people could be harmed
But over a 1000+ year time frame, everyone will return to dust and only the culture will persist. I think it is you who is being shortsighted.
Oh? Why is that, then?
When in a hole, stop digging. Every "mob" you nobly prevent with paternalistic action, you will pay for down the road. You used to understand that, before you were groomed by powerful people to see things their way.
With respect, you’re wrong about twitter’s censorship actions. If you think they suspended the Post’s account over Hunter’s laptop for any reason other than protecting the politician they most agree with, you’re willfully denying reality.
This is what Elon and other "free speech absolutists" don't understand:
That weaponized free speech leads not just to real-world harrassment and even violence, but in extreme cases genocide.
No one is a free-speech absolutist if they pause to think about it for a minute.
Excuse me?
This story was censored and labeled as disinformation likely causing scientists to waste time and resources in developing solutions to the pandemic.
Weird example given the since then released emails showing intent to quash t idea by CDC and NHS officials despite it being what they thought was true...
I do appreciate the broader line of thinking though
wants to try. If not Twitter then something else. You know this angle of argument isn't new at all. I'm one of those that goes back to accessing BBS's on VAX. There is capture at the moment that needs to be addressed imo. I'm sorry you've lost the spirit to fight.
I'd prefer it didn't and would prefer to have mediums where "wise gentlemen wisely saving the world form itself" can not function effectively or at all
Why was that story and Hunter Biden labelled as "disinformation" rather than your explanation?
That is BS because you are making subjective judgements about what *might* cause behavior? Based on biases, not on evidence.
"idea bad because you might do bad thing if you hear it"
Don't you see how authoritarian that is? Not to mention arrogant? Who gave you the clairvoyance to see what path leads where?
Name one example, please.
Please provide news urls that firmly establishes the causal relationships between 1) some people’s words on Twitter and 2) real-world events.
Like during the pandemic the #blm riots and terror?
Well said.
That is also a dumb statement. Where are you getting this from? The real world we have laws that distinguish between mobs and protests, they just need to be enforced. You are suppressing organizing, which is a fundamental right.
So why all the BLM movement wasn’t censored? It caused rods all over the country (USA)
Who's the decider?
What are the criteria that a person should take into consideration before sharing a certain idea in order to avoid censorship? Assuming the lab leak theory is true and I want to discuss it on twitter, how do I accomplish that without causing “damage” that would see me censored?
That's the problem. You shouldn't CENSOR certain "ideas" that might cause mob behavior. These site algorithms cause the most mob behavior so if anyone is responsible for that it's YOU guys. You could at least let the truth out.
Censorship is MORE dangerous. It kills civilizations, not just individuals. Pick the lesser evil.
Your assumption is that civil debate will create more positive change than real world consequences for fuckery.
Maybe that’s why Rome is currently going thru a controlled demolition. By “stepping in”, you’ve enabled a Leviathan that is dragging us underwater.
So what...Maximilian Robespierre will never be put to bed ...ever. He was real.Sometimes (France 1789-1794)Happens because of everything you said in your thread. Everyone fails society, then society invents an apparatus to remove shit heads actual heads. Incl Robespierre.
This post is exactly the reason why people like @elonmusk should buy twitter. To save it from individuals who are willing to suppress truth in anticipation of a “kinetic” mob.
Everything related to BLM would have been censored in Summer 2020 if this were true.
Those letters the feds show up with demanding you do something for them and barring you from ever taking about it that Snowden revealed seems the far more likely cause for this trend.
If that’s the unrevealed method by which determining what is “dangerous” is arrived at then well played.
Yes, especially when you censor them, and wow them off as fake news and lies instead of listening, debating, or just ignoring
I always blame the lightning, never the rod. Speech is not behavior, and is never kinetic.
47 tweets in and their point is finally said: Social media companies ought to find and prevent behaviours that could influence people to break laws.
Isn't that literally the function of the laws themselves?
this is absolutely false and you know it. It was censored for being "wrongthink" and going against the status quo narrative.
It was communicated for being censored as "misinformation". That these things on hindsight weren't misinformation at all makes it all worse for Twitter and the like.
It's just that you can't prove it anymore, they've already done the cleaning, there's no way to prove anything, everything is like whispers in the wind
So I guess it was just a very convenient coincidence that this was being censored at the same time politicians and others were colluding to discredit this idea and label it misinformation or conspiracy? ๐ค
Carefully researched journalism from Vanity Fair is hardly a blog post from some conspiracy yahoo blaming Fauci and subsequently leading to threats to his life. Would those crazies even read this article?
Part of me thinks this might be a test question on your part .. but to take it straight up, it's possible that the article is still false but no longer incendiary.
Fantastic thread ๐ this should be the first chapter of a book about free speech of social media.
Interesting theory, but how does this fit with media operations being shut down (eg the NY Post)?
Is this true? I thought it was more of a "frontlash" or pretext like the big campaigns against harassing Muslims after 9/11, when nobody was actually harassing them. I did not see any online or real activity around lab leak.
It was censored due to the TOPIC, it was irreconcilable with the recommendations of WHO et al..
Let me get this straight - the lab leak theory was censored because SocMedia execs and mods wanted to prevent spam, protect minorities from hate crimes and public officials from harassment?
You can't possibly believe this.
Yea he lost me here.
Bro you’re very naive to think this was the reason.
Naïve B.S.
This is such a lie.
Cop out.
So you don’t think anyone would be racially motivated by the cover story that covid came from weird Chinese people eating bat soup in wet markets? You think blaming a government would be more likely to cause hate towards the general Asian population? I kinda doubt it
Wow! And you think that’s why lab leak theory was banned? You are the naive one..
Ah man, bullshit. Block an entire debates in the world over few criminals in NYC being xenophobic….
Censoring it just made it worse. People couldn't spread their theories online without their rights being violated, and their efforts being undermined by the all powerful network. No wonder they took it to the real world instead
This is such a misdirection of what actually goes on.
And so what, exactly?
context and timing, too. there's a certain person who spreads lots of rumors and conspiracy theories. when he's pushing it, it's prudent to be wary. i don't remember if he pushed it specifically but that was absolutely the operating enviro at the time.
It is very much not “probably true.”
Oh, so you’re an insane person that believes in bullshit conspiracy theories. Good to know.
Lab leak is by no means "probably true".
Yeah he had my attention until spouting this conspiracy. It’s been shown to be more probably not true than true but whatever.
Enjoying this thread, but do some reading on the lab leak theory. Recent studies have largely discredited it.
Probably true ... My god
Sorry, but you clearly don't understand the first thing about viral evolution, which is kind of weird because we've been watching it unfold in real time for the last two and a half years
Then set a rule for spam, nobody likes spam.
Go back to reddit. You think it's the right thing to censor true information because people might do something bad with it. Oh no, can't trust the plebs. Liars deserve the harassment. Crimes should be dealt with by the law, not company policy.
Sorry, you are wrong on that, academia and elements of the government and big tech discredited the lab leak as it was perceived as helping Trump. To this day scientists have moral dilemmas about publishing lab leak papers as it may be seen as pro-Trump.
The lab leak theory is almost CERTAINLY not true, dude. There is incredible evidence for two zoonotic crossover events at the market. The lab leak theory is *plausible*, but no evidence actually supports it.
Right...
If most experts are saying a natural origin is much more likely, and there is no solid evidence for the lab leak hypothesis... It's probably because it isn't true. Occam's razor applies here.
That is really good point @yishan , but have you thought about anyone would benefit from that even might have been causing it as that is their usual solution to any problem. For example #TiananmenSquareMassacre #UyghurGenocide
And that is the worry of most people, can @elonmusk stay natural as he doing business with them and twitter has been a tool for activists to expose them?
Gonna have to disagree on this one. The mainstream media labeled the lab leak theory as racism and actively called for its censorship.
Fauci lied under oath about funding gain of function research, and the "fact checkers" used this as justification for the censorship.
OK now I’m your fan
Where the lab leak theory went off the rails to me when two things got intertwined and implied to be the same: 1) China was engineering some virus to intentionally harm a group of people, 2) In the course of normal scientific research, something got created & got out...
The former spawned all sorts of conspiracy theories and discord, and unfortunately drowned out issues of lab safety standards and such among other things.
It's hardly happening in (US) politics, either.
Meanwhile:
The RNC voted unanimously on Thursday to withdraw from its participation in the Commission on Presidential Debates, the organization that has long governed general-election presidential debates.
@MichaelRWarren
RNC unanimously votes to withdraw from commission that sponsors presidential debates
The Republican National Committee voted unanimously on Thursday to withdraw from its participation in the Commission on Presidential Debates, the organization that has long governed general-election presidential debates.
cnn.com
People move a debate to the digital space when it is not possible in reality because of obvious profit and power interests that have ample incentives to establish a cancel culture that has been a worldwide phenomenon for two years now.
I think the root cause to that is that anonymous posting is allowed. If everybody were forced to use their real name, people would be more gentle.
You lost me here, or you just don't know history, because abolitionists in the south were routinely murdered, no police, sherif, or courts even notified.
๐ฅ๐ฏโ๐ปโฃ
There's debate & discourse, both of which are good & things we should do. Neither of which invites just anyone to debate with any other 1 person that shows up. There's a thing called "Structure " applied so it doesn't devolve into a free for all where no 1 hears anything
save thread
This is why experts in technology shouldn't be mediating this. Way outside of their lane.
SLEEPING GIANT IS ON UNTIL TODAY
Exactly.
This is just dumb, Yishan. Massive people engaging in "debate" is utterly necessary for the functioning of our democracy.
Abusive volume spam and off-site real world harm are different things and lumping these concepts together to make your point just makes you look stupid.
Leave people tf alone. Stay out of it. Be a telephone company..? I don’t understand why you won’t? Way less effort, hassle & $. Real men handle their business and leave others to handle their own. Maybe it’s a nerd thing.. always calling for the ‘teacher’ to settle your business.
We need real fucking men to be running shit, not fucking wet wipes
So what you are saying is, the more outraged someone is the more likely Twitter will censor the opposing view?
"Debates" have never been perfectly civil, perfectly safe, etc. Many people have fought, died, and killed for ideas throughout human history. The idea that Twitter can censor ideas to keep us safe is insane. We have two choices: either let the messy debates rage on and hold...
individual bad actors accountable via the justice system, or censor ideas and foment an entire society and culture full of distrust, polarization, and make us so ineffective that the we rot from within. There is no good option, only a less bad one...
The "noble lies" and "noble censorship" need to stop. We need to focus on real world, pragmatic solutions that actually work 80% of the time. It's the best we can possibly do in a society this large and this diverse. Your efforts at creating safety are creating the opposite.
*almost never prompting
Discussing the possibilities of Covid with early treatment with appropriate cheap and widely available drugs does not seem naive to me. Very much censorship in this area where it is about profits and control of a certain narrative.
It’s not helpful to condemn a perfectly sensible statement. It holds true for IRL, not the internet. Doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
Your cynicism is showing!
Bullshit
They cancel debates now. ๐คท๐ปโ๏ธ
I don't think it's naive. Sure it won't get rid of the bad ideas. But it also won't make martyrs of them. It won't violate the rights of those who have the bad ideas.
Simply ignoring is better than censoring.
Weve all started to believe that we're entitled to not being offended
How naive would be for the one validating censorship and promoting restraint.
Free speech was made to talk about weather.
On topics important enough you’ll always find an army of snowflakes ready to silence any alternative POV.
That's called free speech. The thing you just said was good? That's it. Turns out you don't like it after all. See the problem? Do you? It's in you.
I can’t speak on Twitter or Reddit because I have never been banned on either and frankly I find twitters “hey you sure you want to post this” message refreshing but none of what you said really describes FB where people get banned for words that aren’t even words.
Someone can threaten to rape me in flowery words and I report it and it’s kept up .(this actually happened)
But I write men are the monkeys paw regarding a post about dumb things women did to keep a man that backfired and apparently was promoting hate speech. When I tried to
Appeal and explain I was referring to a short story about being careful what you wish for they upheld the ban. I never know what’s going to set off a ban, there is no transparency on what they want so no it’s not behaviour it’s a war on topics and language
This is obviously false when applied to certain TOPICS. There is no middle ground on acceptance on adult content. There is no "polite white supremacists stance".
You can't make it all about behavior.
Reread the thread. That's EXACTLY what @yishan said.
Great insight. Thank you.
But the algorithm that forces engagement over content IS the problem
A little further down you spoke in glowing terms about @jack who openly admits his left leaning bias. He held up political placards when he came here.
I can safely say that left leaning tweeps in India and the cabal that funds them are much more abusive and biased in their online behaviour. All of us who oppose them be they right or center of right are shadow banned. /2
We're mostly a civil bunch relying on data, facts and published work to get our point across. Lost count of the number of times RW handles are suspended for no reason. Who are we kidding? Same thing on FB. The algorithms are biased. Because their owners are.
/end
if humans sucked less, none of this would be necessary. do better, people. we have the ability.
The problem is that TOPICS are censored. We have the entire "misinformation" suppression of things like the "lab leak theory. But that aside the ideological blinders people have results in different topics being coded as uncivil, so no prescribed code of conduct will be neutral
Curiously the "behavior" that gets censored on Twitter is contesting the US state department narrative.
Totally agree!
The hostile behavior is symptom of what is a greater issue of tribalism. People are nasty to those from a different "team." Trying to remain team-less is also a challenge on its own, since both teams will treat you like you're on the other side, depending on the topic.
Loved reddit when you were at the helm, and I generally find myself nodding along with most of this thread, but I think there are absolutely topics that you can get banned for even if you aren't harassing or attacking anyone. Remember the /r/GenderCritical ban?
This is the tweet. That's it. Nothing left to say.
This is simply not true. First b/c it's a matter of definition ("talking about topic X" can be considered a behaviour). Second (as an example), people get banned all the time for questioning the official WHO/Fauci narrative on Covid even if in the most polite and civil manner.
I run LibraryThing, a tiny social network. This particular point hit home for me very hard. I think I can add to it. LibraryThing doesn't have the developed speech code of some other sites, but we have an unusual behavior code—members are not allowed to insult each other.
That is, LibraryThing members can criticize words or ideas, but they can't insult other members. The combination works because the people with horrible ideas don't want to *discuss horrible ideas*. That's not what drives them. They want to fight people, indeed to hurt people.
So bad people flame out quickly. This even works for disinformation. Being the best educated, smartest site this side of MensaDate helps, but it's also that people who spread anti-vax lies are more motivated by the desire to call others idiots than to discuss fringe microbiology.
While I don't pretend that what works for a small site will work for a global one, I do think they key is to understand why people behave badly and aim at that. Most of all, aim to *make it less fun for them to do so*. Twitter, unfortunately, is designed exactly the opposite way.
Great points.
I would believe that if there were no algorithms or no data mining. But those are stories for another thread.
This point is spot on!
Amen. Blaming the network is always going to be easier that reflecting on your own shitty behaviour.
Ivermectin was censored for "behaviour"? ๐
I agree with this..!
The topic of Hunter Biden’s laptop wasn’t censored during the campaign?
Completely wrong. Stuff gets removed that has nothing to do with behavior.
Amazing to think Musk could be the next Ellen Pao. Taking vitriolic attacks from the people whose free speech he otherwise tried to defend. Of course, be won't have misogyny counting against him.
Nancy Pelosi's trading account being tracked -> banned. First thing, off the top of my head.
Incredible oversimplification and or naivety. How many nice and civil tweets have been zapped as disinformation, even when true?
BULLSHIT
scientists have been banned all over the past two years. due to the TOPICS, nothing else.
u know what the problem is? NOBODY BELIEVES IN YER BS ANYMORE, that’s it.
so here a nice behavior to justify yer point: GO FUCK YERSELF, U BLOODY DICTATOR
This isn't remotely true.
Imagine saying topics aren’t censored when we just lived through Covid-19 censorship at every level.
Bro what planet are you living on? Right wing point of views are clearly targeted for censorship. Progressives push for grooming 5 year olds and no repercussions from Twitter, until a sane person who opposes such cruel practices and calls them out as such, gets censored.
That's not true. People on the right who are perfectly polite get censored when they bring up the wrong topics.
You are ignoring state actors, company driven efforts that relentlessly working on subverting public opinion.
Or should I say "dismissing"?
Stop trying to control behavior.
This is flat out false. The NY Post story about Hunter Biden's laptop was a forbidden TOPIC. Behavior had nothing to do with it. The same goes for many other topics.
While there may be examples "on the left" the exception does not make the rule. I've yet to hear them saying they're targeted
However, read over some of the comments re EM taking over Twitter. My God, the victimhood of those poor imaginarily targeted conservatives is astounding.
I followed this thread pretty much all the way through and you make some great points and observations, but it can’t be only behavior & not “topics” cuz there were certain topics like the Covid leak theory or Hunter’s laptop that got censored, no matter how nice the user was.
Topics are not censored? Are you sure? Vaccine effectiveness. Lockdowns. ANTIFA/BLM riots. Covid origins. Hunter's laptop. Want any more examples?
It’s not topics apart from hunter Biden laptop because that was not good for the overlords, I mean democrats.
Hunter's laptop begged to disagree. Sorry, the foundation of your whole argument thus crumbles.
And here is where you are wrong. The fact is that in reality, it's exactly the opposite of what you said. Topics (more like way of thinking) is what is censored, not behavior. We see this every day.
That’s incorrect. Anti “vaccine” opinions were censored, no matter how polite and accurate they were
I was with you through most of this but this is where you lost your way. It’s twit employees with their finger on the delete button, that don’t agree with the SuBSTANCE of a twit, that are the prob. They’ve been enabled. By you know who. Be honest w yourself.
So maybe have repercussions for "bad behavior" actors? People who are constantly and overly mean, rude, negative?? Haha, I learned my manners from internet!๐๐
Yes, people will behave as they always have. But you’re too easy on the networks; they’re wholly dependent on ongoing engagement so they’re designed to optimise that behaviour and will pay lip service to preventing bad behaviour to protect engagement and therefore revenue.
Your reasoning seems legit (and long), but you're wrong, I've seen plenty of very respectful people being censored here, because of the topic and not because of the behaviour, for example Robert Malone.
The platform is censoring based on topic. not behaviour.
if you don't see it is because you are probably biased yourself
It doesn’t seem that way to me. But perhaps that is because “behavior” is do hard to define, and so simply falls back to “topics” -and more specifically, keywords or other weak model around topics
Tons wrong w the thread. I'll just point out that categorizing behavior (what's good/bad) is itself an inherently political act; it's people (w their politics) who categorize not some algorithm (even those are scripted by, yep, political animals). #Millennials
Please explain where and how the wholesale censorship of the New York Post's true, newsworthy story on Hunter Biden's laptop falls under this "behavior is censored" standard.
This must be the worst take I’ve ever seen here.
You’re being disingenuous. Reddit shutdown gender critical channels made up of mainly liberal lesbians. Twitter used to ban GC people for simply stating “a woman is an adult female.” GCs fought long & hard to bring some semblance of balance. The network is the problem.
this is provably wrong. its explicitly topics. right now google is banning anti-ukraine stuff, regardless of behavior
*COUGH* COVID *COUGH* *COUGH*
This also is not true. Some account on Twitter got banned just for posting 2 tweets side by side of what other accounts had said. Not even adding thier own commentary
Don’t trust any comments here i have been scammed twice ๐ฉ๐ฉ if you need help write to EVAN_HACKS on instagram he is an unban pro. he fix mine
"Gaslighting"
I don't have a problem with them censoring behavior. But that definitely is NOT all that they're doing. Perhaps they are censoring in both directions, but they ARE censoring legitimate concerns.
The Hunter Biden emails story is a prime example of egregious censorship of ideas.
As tech experts they KNEW the emails could be authenticated and had the means to verify the story but instead chose to label it as "fake news".
You’re dreaming. Topics are absolutely banned, because they don’t fit into an acceptable box.
No. You’re literally punished or removed for talking about things that are forbidden. You are either a liar or a fool.
That's odd. I vaguely remember censorship of the NY Post Hunter Biden laptop story. What "behavior" did the Post display that was worth censoring? Some of your lengthy rant I do agree with. But c'mon. They are not censoring behavior & stories of the left. Just those on the right
BEHAVIOR or OPINIONS / THOUGHTS?
Preposterous thread
This for me is a good point.
When i hear someone say twitter has "become too woke and you cant say anything on it anymore"
I think, well ive never been censored & i cant imagine wanting to act in a way which gets me censored. so it must just be ppl who want to behave horribly
I don't dislike this thread just because you're wrong and talking nonsense.
Its your inability to be concise that offends.
It doesn't require a 50 tweet thread to say "people I dislike should be censored".
This is stupid. Human nature is not like this. Let it be. You don’t HAVE to be polite on your platforms. You don’t HAVE to invent and enforce new rules.
False.
But they don't want to do that, nor do they want the conversation. They want to win. That's what this has always been about.
Or abolish section 230
What would the point of that be, when everybodybody lies 100 times a day and I don't?
(The 100 times is a placebo quotation not actual count)
That IS censorship. Calling out lies is arguing and not nice to the people currently in charge of the internet
that's not how things work
Sorry. But that’s a lie and either portrays ignorance or something more nefarious. The platforms removed scientists/doctors/etc and while they had differing viewpoints from the purported ‘narrative’, they were certainly civil and not violating any omega event rule.
I call bullshit! This is patently false for @TwitterIndia. It is a den if leftist ideologues that overwhelmingly strike down pro-nationalist and often innocuous content.
This whole thread is coherently delusional. If only it were true.
Is it time/experience that the human kind need to adapt to massive social connectivity? We have evolved only communicating with several hundred ppl for thousands of years and only the last split second on evolutionary scale been exposed to mass social connectivity
Utopian
I stopped here
This doesn’t make sense.
“stop debating” — SUCH A NICE THING TO SAY IN A FKN DEMOCRACY.
Key to this: Anonymous posters who shit post without consequence can ALWAYS stir things up. Removal of anonymity will impose self restraint to post things they are willing to defend IRL. Eliminate anonymity and everyone will play nice(r).
Quora has a “be nice” policy that is decently enforced, civility really is the only censorship principle that probably most people can agree on. “Be nice” censorship would weed out the more vulgar and blatant harassment posts, subtle jabs would pass through
Let people argue, and be vulgar if they wish.
What's wrong with that? You can always block them.
They can be racist, vulgar, hateful, spiteful, judging, who cares. Let it be. The beauty of freedom.
Lmao, you sure you're not 8 years old my nibba?
Oh GOD! I can tell you have a terrible childhood where you got hit really hard by parents when you didn't "Play nice". Stop arguing? WTF making arguments is the best thing for the world. When no arguments are allowed, guns get pulled out.
How the hell do you play ‘nice’ accurately under someone else’s perception of nice? This is censorship
Megan Murphy
twitter.com/yishan/status/…
This reminds me of the old "zipper" merge argument/technique! It only works if everyone does it no matter what your view on it is.
"Playing nice" isn't going to solve the problem of spreading fake news (remember COVID disinfo?), conspiracy theories or genocide denial.
โI love this. BE NICE
I agree with a lot of this but there are definitely social networks where certain topics themselves are censored because of a political belief that they cannot be discussed in good faith even if everyone in the discussion is behaving themselves. Reddit admins real guilty of this.
But, you know that's impossible when some algorithms prefer negativity. Lot of issues with that too, even if the argument is People love to argue.. why make algorithms to help support that?
Who wasn’t playing nice when they banned the hunter laptop story? This thread is very disingenuous.
The solution “Stop arguing. Play nice. “The catch: everyone has to do it at once.”
And we all know THAT (the catch) is impossible!!
This is easily proven false mate (good thread tho). People (Dr’s or biologists) who state simple facts about gender (a topic) get removed while having been completely nice and kind and reasonable .. and importantly factually accurate. So this point isn’t true.
Mate. You’re an anti-vaxxer propagandist, so your idea of “good doctors” = quacks. In honor of Yishan, I will wish you a good day rather than calling you what I think you are. **curtsy**
But un a plataform whete opinions will be held, points of view exchanged, arguments will happen. I dont see the point of having a rude argument but me trying to be polite might be taken as rude for someone else...and thats how it begins besides people not caring to be polite.
My goodness, what a transformational moment it would be for people on social networks to actually consider the impact of what they say before committing it to record. Even more provocative, what if they decided to say nothing at all? We can dream.
Twitter bots, the majority of which originated in Ru do not “play nice”. They only insult & provoke. Therein lies a problem the far right & sometimes Left magnify.
That's how human beings are, are you saying stop acting like a human when you're online? You can't say the solution is for the problem to go away, sorry try harder.
If you want people to behave correctly, a great improvement would be making it impossible to be anonymous. Or at least give me the choice to read only real verified accounts.
This is simply not true. Civil posts about topics are censored all the time on social media. Twitter suspended The New York Post's account just for reporting on Hunter Biden's laptop, countless YouTube videos have been removed for talking about unacceptable topics, etc, etc...
I’ve been on the internet since Usenet times in the Reagan Administration. What happened there is *exactly* what’s playing out now; the only difference is the size of the stage & the money involved.
So..self-censorship? Who decides which comments are dangerous vs in the spirit of debate?! You say so yourself ‘fix’ one problem, create 3 more. Online & off (the Real World) our chimp brain reacts first & we need to learn breathing before we hit Reply, or taking a nap first.
WRITING WISHFUL THINKING IN CAPITALS DOESN’T MAKE IT ANY MORE TRUE
Or the platform can just let users block each other and the problem solves itself…unless maybe the user is a minor and needs some kind of parental guidance
You are wrong.
If we were to follow your theory Social media platforms wouldn’t exist.
Things you need to censor: violence, abuse, criminal activity.
Whatever the direction of a discussion or idea goes you don’t have a say in it, you can only contribute to it or walk away.
Congratulations, you just defined self-censorship!
Yes, it would be nice if everyone would be polite and civil and agree with everyone else. But real-life people and real-life societies don't.
And wasn't "you make me punish you!" one of the hallmarks of abusers behaviour?
This is the stupidest fucking thing anyone has ever said. Lol
Stop saying things and we won't have to censor you!
Nope. Sorry. I might have been with you until you said everyone has to "play nice" as the solution. That's exactly what the political right wants, and what they use as their main tactic so they appear more civil as they literally strip rights away from marginalized people.
That's why my current project exists. Overview-in-progress at the link:
Shape (Updated 4x)
…of an emerging argument. These eight snapshots (numbered 0–7) walk you through a quick tour. Skip to the last one for the payoff!
medium.com
I glanced at it, saw a lot about decision-making, so before I invest the time to read it, please answer this one question:
Do you reject the notion that there is such a thing as non-action?
Not on a surface reading of your question that I based on broad definitions (yet leaving room for my having misunderstood!)
But I think of action/non-action space as being downstream from decision-making space, if that helps.
Sounds like our legal system.๐ง
Your definition of the "Omega Event" is relative.
Does it have to tho?
And is that not a substantial part of how social spaces spiral out of control? "We *have* to let these awful people talk about these awful things because they're doing it somewhat politely and we can't look like we're taking sides, after all."
This is the entire problem in a nutshell. No they don't.
They self-appointed that responsibility, which as American companies operating under Constitutional principals, they had no obligation to do so.
Who GAF if people yell louder? Enforce the laws of meatspace and we're done.
The reason I don't use reddit anymore AT ALL is not because it was runnover by a left wing mob but because of the moderators. You are incredibly obtuse or disingenuous if you think these platforms do not have a bias both to whatever flavor their user base is and profit
y tho
Oh yeah , things are running smoothly atm
Sure, that’s why Zuck spent $450 million on left wing interference in the election on behalf of far left Democrats
Complete free speech is the only level playing field. What happened to ‘sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me’. And if people are organising to break bones, today you can’t stop them, but at least people you can see it.
Sitting president.
Maybe if twitter limited the number of times any given user can reply to a post and its chain of replies, besides the original poster.
People may be more civil, & hesitant to argue if the OP is guaranteed the last word.
Also, allow anyone to like the OP, but only allow the original poster to like replies on the reply chain. That would take away a lot of satisfaction people get from being dicks.
How to run a polite social plataform without censorship?
Welcome to Twitter where you're free to say the most bigoted, vicious, sociopathic shit you can imagine, but we draw the line at telling someone to fuck off - that's rude.
your generation abdicated scaled moderation strategies
Which is why I hate the "we can't say anything anymore" spiel. Because the problem is exactly the opposite.
We say whatever the hell we want, and unfortunately, arrogance being a thing, we tend to double down even when it's bullshit that we say.
thank you @chamath ๐คฃ๐คฃ
Seems there could be a model to better mimic irl social interaction, eg reputation and shunning help moderate most interactions. One’s reputation could start weak, grow stronger along various axes, even differing across various communities, and we could set our own thresholds.
I’m sure others closer to it have thought about it harder, I’m just not sure what’s the hold up :)
because they are allowed to be anonymous!
Flaw # 1
oh no we're in the ghost house tour
yes it is possible, it exist and its called 9gag
Wait what? for someone who is into personal development and wellbeing, how is censorship of basic health related information a cause for concern in " instigating bad behaviour" category ?
If you go into, say, a grocery store and start yelling and screaming and spitting on people, you will be removed with however much force is needed.
No one yells about THEIR free speech rights, and rightly so.
Yup, it’s called free speech. You lefties get upset very easily, even when obtaining an affectionate ribbing from a righty etc. If your Mum and Dad didn’t love you, it’s probably because you’re unlovable! Don’t take it out on society. (Please) X
It’s the squabbling that makes them money.
If this is true, then why didn't they create an algorithmic feed that reduces conflict instead of elevating?
Say, a post gets a lot of abusive language (easy to identify). The algorithm should then hide that post to reduce conflict, instead of rewarding it with more exposure.
The reason, obviously, is conflict means more engagement, more engagement is more views, more views more money.
Can't say they "kind of" care about money and wish people would be civil while building a system that profits off of increasing conflict and letting bots muck about
(In keeping with your theme though, I appreciate the thread though I disagree with some foundational assumptions)
^^This. Money (more specifically, KPI's proving they're making money) is the motivating factor. And that 'if it bleeds, it leads' has shifted from being tongue in cheek secondary effect, to being the main drive.
They sure spend a lot of time monetizing their platforms to not care about money.
and i understood that hate is the most attention catching leading more money to these platforms and thats why their algos produce such a diviaive content for people to watch...
Then stop enforcing it
No they don’t — they wish we will continue to spend time on their platforms and give it our attention.
All else equal? Give it our attention and don’t fight. But, first and foremost — give it our attention.
All they care about is money
Why did Zuckerberg meet with Trump, then? Btw I love Reddit
Incorrect. They quite literally only care about $. That's why digital advertising has always called people "users". They just want your eyeballs. That's all that matters so they can turn around and sell advertising around it. I should know. I sold your eyeballs for over 13 years.
You, as a human being, do not matter to these companies. Your demographics and offline/online shopping behaviors are the only things they see of value in you. You're not a human being to them. You're simply a CPM.
Except Twitter doesn’t care about making money.
$1 of Twitter stock in 2013 is $1.08 today.
Twitter cares about control of minds and supporting D policies. Period.
They absolutely only care about money. Civility is a way for them to be more appealing to the main stream but also controversy generates ad revenue. These are publicly traded companies dude, not day care centers. Why do you think it took so long to ban trump. Money machine
Lol, kind of care about money!? Goddamn you should sit this one out.
But if we shut up and stop ‘engaging’ so much they’ll make less money right?
Was with you until you suggested that tech companies are in it for something besides the money.
Then why suppress important information that could swing elections!!!! You are WRONG
Rein in your damn ago, you can write some code, it doesn’t mean you have much useful to say outside of it.
Your views are the usual toxic reactionary pedestrian techbro nonsense, stop embarrassing yourself.
๐ค they literally actively encourage the opposite
Shut up yourself Yishan. You have an inflated sense of your own self importance. Now listen,
Are you listening?
Wait for it….
No one cares. ( and annoyed at kk for recommending I read your message, even if only for a joke).
They only care about money, its all money, nothing else. To think about it as anything but a monetary issue is muddying the waters. Civility doesn't drive engagement, they want you to be angry and post, so you'll spend more time on their sit being advertised to. You know nothing!
You can get back your funds refunded to your wallet reach out to willls_tools on Instagram provide him with detailed information about the transaction
Do you have the transaction details?Then contact
Willls_tools
If you do have it or any details regarding the scam, contact
Willls_tools on Instagram
He helped to recover scammed crypto
Reddit is insanely woke dude
Ok but what about all the stories about FB knowing their platform was radicalizing people and doing nothing about it even as it led to genocide in Myanmar? I think FB might be an exception here (though your core message can still resinate w in that)
You can’t explain the Hunter Biden media blackout without accepting that they do care about the argument. Trump was proof it was bias.
Actually reddit is the worst culprit. The fact mods are un moderated leads to a lord of the flys scenario. Political sub reds are the worst kind of cancel culture social media you can find. With mods drunk on their own power crafting little echo chambers. Just sayin like
Not sure about this part in particular, but good thread nonetheless. Pretty sure they care about politics. Especially if they’re seeking therapy over just the *thought* about Elon buying them out.
Wrong on this
“Yes, the execs are (whatever demographic) and the employees are (whatever politics) but they don't care about it. They don't.”
Yes twitter suppressed Hunter Biden’s story bc they didn’t really want squabbles
If you’re dumb to believe that you’re dumb to believe anything.
Isn't the point of employees/execs don't care a bit untrue. We have seen so many hysterical takes from employees not willing to serve anymore if xyz ideologues occupy important positions -- seen that with Peter Thiel and Facebook, and also now with Elon and Twitter.
Agree w most of what you wrote, but the politics of the employees line is demonstrably false.
They couldn’t scream much louder if they tried.
And this is a good thing. Most software companies if not all don’t care about one side or the other. They literally just care about creating a great product for its customers. It’s the people or the customers that are causing the actual issues. The “bad apples”
"... and the employees are (whatever politics)"
So it is possible that
"... and the employees are right wing".
I mean, come on.
Anyway, lots of good stuff here, sorry to nitpick
If they don’t care then they should just ignore it. Easy. It’s simple.
This reminds me of a @CKlosterman essay (think in Sex Drugs & Cocopuffs) about what it’s like to *actually* work in a newsroom and how the idea of bias in reporting is unfathomable once you’re on the inside and realize all these reporters/editors are just trying to hit a deadline
I have no doubt that the coders, and the digital janitors (network/security/ i, e infrastructure backend ppl) care either way about any of these twitter squabbles. However.. the customer support class (because silicon valley is more stratified than in your simple example)
The customer support class (mostly heavily left wing Bay Area residents) are in charge of making this a safe space and homogenically left wing. They're the ones making the calls of which posts stay up and which don't. They can easily strike down any counterargument as trolling.
Facebook leaked discussions show otherwise. They know they control the public narrative, and rogue people in the company aren't afraid to abuse that power. Facebook more or less has become the World Gazette. By a symple tweaking of their algorithms they decide what gets airtime.
It does not matter if they “care” about it or not.
Their political leanings and beliefs are critically important to the platform.
It affects who gets to speak and who does not.
They censor some and promote others.
That's patently not true. And to say so discredits everything else you say.
I find it hard to believe this bit given the moaning and wailing from the Twitter employee base about how @elonmusk buying Twitter is the end of the world.
Maybe they're a vocal minority?
Holy shit, how can anyone type these words altogether in good faith
“(whatever politics)”
Yes, who could possibly know what those politics are. To say so out loud would be harmful speculation ๐
This is self evidently untrue. If 90% of your staff involved in regulating content are left/woke (largely true) they will “moderate” accordingly.
Why would you be dissembling about this?
Hunter Biden’s laptop seemed like a pure political play across most platforms. Not an exception to the rule when it is performed at pivotal moments. That’s what we call, strategy.
Interesting. The real issue seems to be that everybody appears to have lost the ability to have a debate, to state an opinion & then back it up... they seem to think the only way to disagree with someone else's views is to yowl personal about at them, rather than present ../..
... a counter-argument demonstrating why they hold a different opinion.
Oops, Typo in above, should read 'yowl personal ABUSE at them', sorry.
As long as the executives of social media platforms aren't investing in understanding the harm / benefit of their platform but rather focus on maximizing profit humanity is going to be manipulated to it's detriment.
But they do where it concerns them making money
Not caring about politics doesn’t free you from horrible bias. In fact you may be less informed and more emotional than even the artists that opine and wish to be philosopher kings.
I don't believe this.
Now do "Face Flags" ...which flags were enabled/encouraged by these supposed neutral Social Media platforms and which were never allowed? You thread is interesting but you are just spreading more mis/disinformation buddy. There was/is systemic bias and censorship
Twitter executives may not have cared about politics. But if their rank-and-file employees (especially their censors in 'Twitter Safety') have strong political passions in favor of one side, then their internal pressure could certainly create some bias in favor of that side.
Well said. Agreed!
Are you joking? They don’t care about politics?
They know what they’re doing, they know the power they wield, they know what’s at stake.
Big Tech knows it, banks know it, the CIA & other intelligence agencies know it, politicians know it, foreign govt’s know it.
Cut the BS.
Yes he was. They didn’t want him re-elected period. You are simply wrong. Way too much clear evidence. All big tech is run by lefties. Same on Linkedin. I run a platform too and see both sides of it. It’s called Bizfluence.
Is this true though? There is plenty of evidence that Mark Zuckerberg— along with many others in the FB/Meta C-suite— in fact *care very much* about politics.
“humans misbehave when there are no immediately visible consequences” well put, would be interesting if there was a “social score” attached to your profile, but I’m sure that would open up other problems.
1/2 The problem is humans and not social media. We are still tribal chimps with big brains throwing figurative poop at each other. A new/updated social platform won't fix that and Elon can't fix it anymore than anyone else. However I think there's another motivation here..
2/2 Vertical Integration people! Vertical as in look up. I have always seen Starlink as a satellite smartphone company masquerading as an ISP to get around Govt Regs. Twitter has great terrestrial infrastructure that complements Starlink. Forget edit button, Video Calling asap.
I'm not a trump fan in any way. however the fact that he was banned from being able to speak is enough for me to support @elonmusk in every way on this.
I don't like what you're saying.. in most of this. That being said.. I for one think you have EVERY right to speak.
Do you honestly believe Musk wouldn't ban people for their speech too?
Looks at the news. Huh. There’s Trump. Just because he can’t post of Twitter doesn’t seem to impede his ability to put news out including on his own social network.
Let users decide what they want to experience, who they trust to verify & then we can enjoy more of one another w/out blocking. I might really like your rodeo content but not want to hear any your politics or travel. We can make the world happier & safer UXTuning.com
This is really weak. Evidence of Trumps incitement of a “resurrection” is just not there. There were crazy people at the Capitol that day, but nothing any crazier than storming Kavanaughs hearings, the BLM riots, etc. if it was an insurrection how many guns were confiscated?
Yea sure buddy, either wishful thinking or straight up deceitful, silicon valley gisnts DO CARE ABOUT POLITICS and THEY ARE ALL PUSHING MARXIST WOKE IDEOLOGIES
Bla Bla Bla False Equivalency Bla Bla Bla.
Oh for sure. Tech billionaires and their backers have absolutely no politics whatsoever. Five-star take.
Are you really this naive?
How did Trump threaten Twitter’s platform? That statement needs a detailed explanation.
This is incorrect. I worked at Google for 11 years. There are people who very passionately care about politics and are willing to do pretty much whatever it takes to push their viewpoint into Google’s products.
I'm also an ex-Googler and can 100% attest to this. I was there when Trump won the presidency in 2016. The next day, it was like a bomb had gone off at Google. There was an emergency all-hands company meeting with the heads of Alphabet literally in tears.
Yup, was there too and remember this well.
Did your office also have every single person showing up wearing black the next day? It was like the death of planet earth had just happened.
My small team reported into a very senior exec in the inner sanctum and it was clear how the news went down.
I was on the DoubleClick side and all hell was breaking loose.
Sounds about right!
Ex-Wikipedian and also attest this. Every organization becomes increasingly biased during the journey. Experiences shape preconceptions. Formal hierarchies & gregarisms turn original purposes into power games & internal politics. That's the time to reset or move on.
cc @elonmusk
I liked usenet. Good, honest, thoughtful discussions.
They censored a true story because it would damage the Democrat candidate for president. Not political at all, no sir.
"I don't care about politics" is a fundamentally right wing ideological choice lol
That’s what I was trying to ask Elon on Twitter here.. so he’s going to allow people who are don’t believe in climate change to organize and perpetuate that idea? (I assume it goes against his worldview.)
Great stuff-If you see this can you comment on why it seems to centrists that soc. media seems to want to amplify dissent? I can't reconcile that w/ your point above
Neither the right nor left biases you mentioned resonate w/ me personally, though I'm sure they do with many
๐๐ป
I like it...
#DoOnlyGoodEveryday should be an omega event....
Good thread, and mostly agree and some I probably won't pretend like I could understand at a core level. But saying musk isn't prepared for that battle is like assuming HE built the tesla...
All clues point to power/politics. Every sentence you put here is the same
i know the content mod. of a big social network and assure you although they try to be balanced there's clear bias on all important issues as they are decided abritrarly. Main guiding principle: go with the most conformist position causing least media outrage; and MSM is leftist.
If your friends from both side need to keep screenshots and evidences, something is running wrong, don’t you agree?
BS- can you really claim SM censors are apolitical- no one believes this- 99% are left leaning- explain why Trump was deplatformed? Questioning election irregularities does not = violence or insurrection. Easy solution for censorship headaches: don't do it!!!
Wrong.Dorsey admitted to a left bias in twitter algo , came to India & actually held up a placard saying something pretty political.
He did care about politics & so does FB.
You can say that but it isn’t true. Joe much money did Zuckerberg throw into the last election?
I would love to see where the average Twitter employee lies on the political spectrum. I have the feeling they care very much about politics.
Fuck these people are weird
It's almost like social media is largely unmoderated because there are no laws holding the social media companies responsible for the content they host. ๐ค
India enforced laws (kind of regulations) to make social media platforms more responsible.
India's new social media rules explained - Tech Wire Asia
India’s new social media rules comes as several governments around the world are closely examining the impact of technology firms.
techwireasia.com
That's a problem
First-hand observation negates the "They DON'T CARE ABOUT POLITICS" claim. Unless you count frantic SJWs as non-political.
No, they care about politics. We can type entire novels to the contrary but that doesn't change the obvious truth.
Liar liar pants on fire
I was half nodding my head thinking maybe he’s onto something…until I saw this one. They most certainly do care about politics. They literally allow communist governments to tweet, Terrorist organizations also. But ban conservative or right wing voices…
How many rocket ships have you launched? Alright then
He was de-platformed for being disreputive and repeatedly not following the rules of the platform.
They don’t care about politics? Wow dude. Wow.
Mods would have to do less of a job, if ppl had to take ownership of their "free speech". The prob with "free speech" on the internet is that you can post horrible things anonymously. Use Decentralised ID on a blockchain, & say whatever with your chest.
How to Fix Twitter: Prism, Crypto, dids and Verified Tweets
How to Fix Twitter: Prism, Crypto, dids and Verified Tweets
youtube.com
Absolute nonsense. Just because both sides claim bias doesn't mean there is none what a pathetic weak argument for such a long rant
if politics were irrelevant Elon's takeover would have already succeeded. Twitter is risking their own hides to avoid this
You believe Trump led an insurrection which could have ended democracy as we know it. And you want to be taken seriously as non partisan. Trump didn’t tell anyone to break into the Capitol. And I bet you had no problem with Dems and media calling him a Russian asset. That was ok
Honestly, this thread, or series or intertwined threads, has given me a lot to think about. My initial reaction to trump ban explanation is a Chris Nolan quote: “You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.” … Survival at what cost.
Donald Trump using the platform to overthrow the rule of democracy would be an omega event. When you create ultimatums with a future that hasn’t happened yet, you become the villain… such is the moral of AOT. Twitter is Eren.
You’ve built an understanding of the world that’s based on a lopsided duality of worldly events and reactive ideology, but even then predicate your argument on the idea of being proactively immoral to avoid assumed outcomes. This is the ultimatum. This is living too long.
They do care. You underestimated the influence that big techs tried. It’s not about stupid people little fights, it’s about dividing real world of which side would win.
If they didn’t care about politics they wouldn’t be holding emergency meetings and adopting poison pills to stop a non-liberal from buying Twitter
Hahaha then what was he removed for?
Finally someone gets it!
This may be the stupidest thread I have ever read on Twitter. And that is going some.
An A.I can Come up with All necessary Perspectives on any important topic you have by using the Knowledge we ourselves have used Through Philosophers , Religious leaders and World Leaders as Well A business Titans. But Why would we have This Nice technology controlling what
Stupid is?
I don't agree with all of this but I agree with some. Forget Trump, why were Berenson and Dr Malone banned? They've been proven right at least somewhat. Yet someone like Randi Weingarten, who lies every day, faces no consequences. That's why you saying they don't favor the left
Is tough for me to agree with
Bullshit
LMAO, what a whopper. They don't care about politics he says.
Sir, you may be intelligent, but this is a moronic argument.
I think you lost everyone at that point. They really do care about politics. Obviously.
Super easy fix: make platforms NOT responsible for content moderation, put that back in the courts where it belongs. they should be neither allowed to or responsible for censorship. make content producers responsible for all their content as before. everyone gets to grow up.
The time constant for courts is so long that real world consequences of online abuse would already have occurred. In effect, we need to scale the "court" to act in real time, and no one knows how to do that.
Thats just like real life. We all manage not to die somehow.
You could always just start your own platform and run it as you see fit.
You are deranged and can't be taken seriously if you think these platforms don't have a lean based on their political view. Maybe Reddit less so but I think brain slipped out of your head when writing this essay.
save thread
A bunch of tweets from someone with 3 followers and 1 retweet is not evidence of a mass movement.
Your rant was nonsense because 1) your woke friends are patently wrong to suggest social media protects racists and 2) many people have been doxxed, terminated, banned and labeled 'bigots', 'racists', 'misogynists' for having questioned wokism.
Mate. Shut up.
How could they? In what universe would it even really be possible with so many millions of users.
ain't no time for this essay shit
The response to the offer proves this is incorrect.
This is where you lost me.
I don't know if you're simply naive or malicious but since you ran Reddit, I'm leaning towards the latter.
Yeah, okay. This is next level rationalizing. No political bias, they just want us to stop arguing. I’ve never read such bullshit in my entire life.
hahaha nice try...
This is the dumbest tweet I’ve ever seen ๐
I used reddit circa Obama's first time and what I dont get is how they went from being so freedom of speech zealous they left up JailBait for years but within a few years were moderating minor bullshit. Just shut the child porn down and the people calling for genocides.
He was eliminated for being right-wing and for being a real threat to the establishment. that's the truth.
Yike you couldn’t be more wrong and sound like a bigger idiot. But it’s great your not banned for having idiotic views and myself and so many others can now see them and form opinions on how out of touch you are. Man free speech is great!
Obviously true. Way to cut to the point through that mountain of bs.
Great thread,
“They DON'T CARE ABOUT POLITICS. They really don't.”
What a gigantic load of horse shit!
Zuck spent half a billion to take over strategic points of our election infrastructure to rig the outcome of a national election.
Please!
They DO care about politics; they really do.
The big question is: How did we end up in a situation like this? Where the woke ideology came from and how it became the official language of the educational system?
They don't care about politics? ruined your thread in one statement
Someone who is thoroughly convinced of the immediacy of the existential threat of climate change might sincerely believe the stuff said. Woke progressives don’t perceive themselves as biased when they promote censorship. The right doesn’t fear speech from the left.
This naive post shows how disconnected big tech thinks we all are. Zuckerberg, Dorsey, Bloomberg, Bezos, etc used their ownership of media to bias the 2020 election and to engineer the Covid-19 crisis. All contributed millions and used platforms to get their desired results.
Hogwash. Jack Dorsey cared about politics, trust me. He made it clear.
How naive are you?
So when FB and TWTR censored hunter biden laptop story that was jst "dealing with a squabble" or "not caring about politics" ๐คก
Solid assumptions on Musk as well ๐
Read a bunch tweets that amounted to a bad take. Thanks @elonmusk for commenting & getting this trash in my tmeline
They do.
Um mark zuckerman spent $300 million or something to get Biden elected. It’s going to be hard to take anything more that you say seriously.
Posts like these are why i can't read books anymore. Quality content. Twitter is worth far more than what Elon wants to pay for it. However he does have a point, and i hope Twitter pursues that thought.
Oh please, Twitter is about politics and censorship. You forgot what free-speech is all about. ๐คฆ๐ผโ๏ธ
Both the woke & libertarians claim the network is against them because the network IS (bold & italic) against the people. All people.
But shut up and kick stones rightโ
Maintaining free speech is the EASIEST Thing in the world to the non-tyrant, you simply have to do NOTHINGโ๏ธ
The blue hairs certainly care about politics. The low level losers that get a little bit of power - the ban button - they lean far left. Very few open conservatives are employed at Twitter.
nope. they care for sure. they all liberals that think trump is racist and dangerous. whether that is true is not the issue. they believe he is.
That ideas alone are powerful, therefore dangerous, is such a cop out. Idk about you, but I'm not ever going to engage in x behavior just because someone posts about y idea. We can't just chock it up to mob dynamics; individuals need to be held to a higher standard of conduct.
See though, that's the thing: the left has controlled the internet for a long time; it was at one time a place to escape the oppression of conservatives, but now the conservatives are using it too, and the left has become overly oppressive because THIS is their baby.
Fact Check: FALSE
You seem to have forgotten that as someone who used to run Reddit, that Reddit would be nothing without the downfall of Digg, and that happened largely because of the Digg Patriots fiasco.
Without the Digg Patriots, there is no v3, where Digg tried (very poorly) to add features to suppress coordinated efforts to promote conservative opinions and voices. Reddit had downvotes to let liberals do that easily, and that worked for a while.
Why hide the hate, vitriol & stupidity by censoring?
The big change needed is only users who have to pay for Twitter are the anonymous users.
If they are bigots, haters & Assholes, to stay on the platform they have to become non anonymous and instead of blue check it's Scarlet A
But it doesn't now. Instead, Reddit relies on moderators and administrators who use their judgement, which is derived from their opinion, which is formed by their culture, which is inherently liberal, to make judgement calls.
I used to be a liberal, until I started making money and liberals started caling me racist and mysogynic because I believe in working hard and producing results instead of getting paid while posting on facebook and twitter.
Hell, I went to therapy because I couldn't get my face out of my fucking phone because I felt like shit getting paid to not work. People now think that you should be awarded jobs and companies should be happy you're willing to sit in an office chair. This is wrong.
You earn to live, not the other way around. You're not entitled to a job, a car, and a house just because you graduated college. You're still expected to produce in society; a fat salary and rich benefits are not entitlements, they're earned by working hard and being productive.
What's a simpler solution: moderate less.
You have this particular bias BECAUSE you went down the path of trying to play daddy for your users.
If you instead tried to let users decide what content they want to see you would come away with very different conclusions.
Neither is 'easy' that I'll grant.
But you basically come from a background of attempting to moderate everything, and then complain about how hard that is and think that musk would have to go down the same path. He doesn't. He can travel the path you never took.
But liberals don't want to hear that, so conservatives attack that work ethic and the behaviors associated with entitlement and laziness, and because those criticisms are valid, the liberals move to supress those voices.
This is not true. Tech companies very much care about politics and will have parties or need counseling based on who wins an election or becomes a judge. I work at tech companies and see it first hand. Management is very political and it informs thier product decisions
You lost me. Twitter has been outed&Zuckerberg has bragged about deplatforming @DonaldJTrump and pushing the algorithms to move progressive and lead elections to the left. It’s not side against side it’s your bullshit against the truth right here. @elonmusk
Simply can’t believe this. Too much evidence to the contrary
You lost me right here. Not because of orange man talk but from the they dont care about politics. Maybe they really dont, but those who fund them to take down certain posts and ban certain people do. Look who are large stake share holders currently.
No, tRUmp was deplatformed for causing & encouraging a crazed right ring mob to storm the US Capitol in a futile, yet lethal attempt to overturn a Free & Fair election.
This thread seemed legit until the claim that the companies that banned valid & accurate Hunter Biden stories in the weeks prior to our Presidential election “don’t care about politics.” I remember them blocking DM of the links. They do care & no amount of lying will hide it.
This is really naive and stupid
I’m not a Trump fan, but he is a political figure, his speech is political in nature, he is not affiliated with an ongoing terrorist group (unlike others on the platform), and he should absolutely be on Twitter. Any tweets that violate equal and transparent rules can be removed.
The assertion that Trump was not removed due to political bias is laughably absurd.
Bullshit. It drives engagement, which boosts ad clicks etc
I'd buy this argument if we didn't have video of people who work for these companies talking about it running them. And if employees weren't also activists. You haven't explained either.
I disagree. I believe Facebook and other social media sites are directly working with the government to manipulate society. They also track and store all data fed into a supercomputer AI like Rehoboam in westworld to make predictive AI about how society will behave via inputs
Bullshit. If they didn't care about politics then they would surely take Elon's generous offer. Once funds are secure and the company is private then they can focus more on writing features.
Utterly stupid take number 3. Where are you going with this?!?!
Not buying this
Only if that would be true…
Care to explain the millions and millions donated from tech people to Democrats? Care to explain the burying of actual, factual news that could cause prejudice Democrats?
Again, this series of tweets are full of crap.
I could buy that about some of the platforms but not FB. Zuck may not be political himself, but it was no accident that he put Joel Kaplan in that policy role and we know what happened in 2016.
"World politicians don't care about a rogue billionaire owning Twitter because they don't care about politics" my guy this is all about the political opinion(power). Expect political retaliation at this move like you never seen before. These people will bomb countries for less.
Prob unwittingly,but you’re lying to urself if you say you don’t have any political agenda. Even if you dont realise it. Now you pause & think about it. You literally used the word “us” when you mentioned another country using free speech against “us”. Personally, I’m on no side
Yes he was.
They DO, big time!
I seriously doubt that. People are NOT robots built with the sole function of serving. The power and control is there for them and they clearly chose to take it. Who wouldn't? It is of course a difficult thing to resist. You have a flawed understanding of humans, I'm sure of it.
“You have a flawed understanding of humans, I’m sure of it”
You only need to look at what happened when Yishan, an engineer, attempted to be a CEO, something which requires understanding of people and motivations, at Reddit to see that this is unfortunately and painfully true.
They care about money. What makes a social network it's money? People arguing over stupid shit. Wait.. look.. you're arguing with people.. I'm arguing with you. Twitter just made a bundle.
This thread was great until this point. What major left wing figures have been banned? What left wing narrative/speech is censored? It's clearly one-sided
More importantly the left now openly favors censorship. People on the left now say "I do not support free speech." Ask them.
I'm on the left, and I adamantly support free speech.
Thats great, I didnt mean to imply 100% of the left but what I said is a statistically true fact. Scroll to partisan divide here:
More Americans now say government should take steps to restrict false information online than in 2018
48% of US adults say the government should restrict false information online, even if it means losing some freedom to access/publish content.
pewresearch.org
They don’t care about politics yet they banned a sitting republican president from Twitter.
Covered up a Democrat presidents embroilment in his sons laptop scandal as “russian disinformation”
And Facebook went out of their way to pay for physical drop boxes to aid Democrat votes.
Way too naive. How do you think Joe is in the WH? 81 mi votes ? lol
"They DON'T CARE ABOUT POLITICS."
That is ridiculous and proves, you have no clue of what you're talking about.
After reading your apologetics for systematic social engineering via online censorship, I understand how Reddit became the hot garbage echo chamber it is now. RIP Aaron Schwartz
I was with you enjoying your thread until the LAST TWEET which comes to discredit everything you have mentioned before. Social media is NOT POLITICAL???? That is a very naive statement coming from a genius like yourself….
Absolutely Trump was banned due Twitters crap political beliefs.
Putin and the Russian Embassy (DC) continue to promote obvious lies and promote hate - yet All Russian govt accounts are still active.
Fabulous. Thank you, sir
Twitter banning the Biden laptop story was a hundred percent about politics. What do you think it was?
Dualism is a particular illness, especially in a tech world committed to reduction of all life & thought to 0s and 1s.
Yishan left out wealth and later, power as prime motivators.
Because people like Zuckerberg have no moral belief system, doing something cuz one CAN is the 1/
just the beginning. Impressing billionaires and then joining them to manipulate the data to manipulate the hordes is an entirely acceptable, no, desirable, outcome. $$$ & thirst for the power it brings are predictable outcomes for human impulses of greed and control.
You have explained why Reddit lost, and how mushy modern redditors brains are. That's about it.
Well written. I’m pretty sure Musk’s motives have little to do with free speech. He’s on phase 2 (3?) of saving mankind and the biggest problem facing us isn’t technical at all, it’s social. It’s people actively working to prevent the big efforts we need to save ourselves.
all Elon has to do is give 1 share to each verified Twitter handle after kyc
the trick is to close the feedback loop and maintain incentives
Thanks - a very smart thread! Of course human nature is still human nature and so people will continue to squabble, thats why we have so many lawyers (modern day knights for hire to fight for you) and, yes, we’ve just taken our fights online now.
If everyone is directionally biased towards the adjudication system and considers it skewed, against them/towards someone else, then wouldn't removing *any* adjudication and publicising it be better than trying to "adjudicate our squabbles"
Just let the fights happen.
Sorry but I disagree.
Praise the Lord.
sorry, what was the point?
In the beginning i didn't believe you, but i shouldn't of doubted you.... It definitely was a long ๐งต
fr, enjoyed your take.
(No comment)
A billionaires temper tantrum.
Spoken like an egotistical moderator from Reddit. You're ignoring a multi-billion dollar operation to push right wing ideology coming from not only private, but government actors. You ignore FSB. Ignore Cambridge Analytica. There are no comparable actors on the Left.
GET REAL.๐
Well you made me lose my time reading useless take on this situation. Yes they are politically oriented and the solution is pretty simple : freedom of speech to the extent of what's possible. Stop trying to help them ... You are witnessing a sleeping majority waking up ...
Twitter censoring is about showing NWO as ok
Forcing vax is ok
China is ok
To take away Trump account is simply not acceptable; you like him or not
Maybe just changing every member of the board and CEO could work a little pro freedom of speech
That's all?? ๐๐ Bruh where's the TLDR version of this 100 tweet thread
I think although you make a valid point, it's too simplified. When the fact of the matter is that there IS a group of sociopaths/psychopaths planning to depop the world and install a global system of ultimate control over humans, do you think they dont influence social media..?
Hi @yishan, Loved your precise writing, learned a lot. Qn I can't get an answer to : Why does Twitter have ANY obligation to be the *public* square? Are Trump supporters disabled in anyway by his being off Twitter? They just have yet another conspiracy theory to rally around.
That's it?
break down how that culture among the right manifested. the republicans took the white house for 3 straight terms. conservatives felt they had the power so they needed to fix the world by banning nasty speech and depictions of sex and violence. the left is doing the same shit.
So basically you're saying Reddit's failed censorship lead to lots of issues, but you present it as an argument against no censorship while it really appears like an argument in favor of no censorship
That was true pre-2014 when you ran Reddit but it is definitely no longer true today.
A big chunk of employees are now *extremely* interested in which side their company takes.
Cool then they either need to accept responsibility as publishers of their users content or accept the same regulation other common carriers are subject to. Sec 230 is untenable as-is.
And here you almost had me fooled into thinking you knew what the hell you were talking about
Social platforms are not common carriers and nothing would bring them down faster than holding them liable for what users publish
I can't think of a stance that is less reasonable
Maybe you should have read what I said more carefully, because this isn’t even close to what I argued.
Did I say Twitter is a common carrier?
May I ask you, in a more polite way, how exactly you’re reading what I said? What is it you think I’m arguing here?
Or… here: to avoid dickwad pedantry, why don’t I just say more about what I meant and where I think our misunderstanding is, and you can let me know if I’m wrong.
I didn’t say the social media platforms are common carriers because I don’t think they are, or at least I’m not sure they are. I’m agnostic on that question: I don’t know enough.
And I definitely don’t think “§230 immunity is predicated on any sort of "neutral" moderation” — the opposite.
What I’m fairly sure of is that what the platforms wanted (and got) with §230 was all of the immunity and freedom from regulation common carriers get, and all of the speech protection and freedom to moderate that publishers get, with the obligations of neither.
They wanted to host others’ speech with as little moderation as they could get away with, while still promoting or demoting certain kinds of speech based on its content so they could serve up algorithmically-tailored extremist and radicalizing content for engagement and profit.
They get to pretend to be publisher or common carrier at different times, wherever it’s most convenient for their business model.
So when @yishan describes a problem where they’re tediously pulled away from their “core” product functions by toxic squabbling, my point is: that’s by design, because they wanted it that way.
As a result: [gesticulates wildly at everything here]
As an example near and dear to us, let’s assume something that’s likely to be true:
You’re a professional in this field, and an expert with more firsthand knowledge of this subject than I have.
On a network without “social media” in front of it, you’d be identified that way in our conversation, so that our opinions can be given appropriate weight.
Twitter & other social media platforms *can* do that with a blue check, or an algorithm tweak on in a good-Samaritan kind of way (or more cynically, to brand themselves). But they really don’t wants to — to save resources and headache they’d rather treat us as equal “passengers”.
And that’s because they profit from *worsening* the quality of our conversations and encouraging our squabbling.
And that’s why I responded to the OP by saying that the best-of-both-worlds, two-faced status quo maintained by §230 is untenable.
This whole analysis only works if you willfully ignore the intermediate legal liability of content distributors. Bookstores have been allowed to selectively curate content while still having a partial liability shield for the content they do distribute.
This is a great point! That’s because they’re a retail marketplace and entitled to stock whatever it is they’ve chosen to sell. But what social media companies sell isn’t user speech, it’s advertising. And their users aren’t their customers.
What they sell is advertising *and user information* — in this example their users aren’t the authors, they’re the books.
There's no good reason why that should matter.
If it's right to allow traditional distributors to selectively censor while still keeping a liability shield, why is it wrong to let websites do that?
Why should the monetization method make any difference?
Right, Stratton Oakmont said that websites don't get distributor protections... if they do something that distributors had always been able to do.
Frankly, it was a bad decision that would have been overturned soon if the passage of section 230 hadn't made it moot.
agreed, it was just so outrageous that businesses were like 'we cannot operate on this new internet if compuserve gets this decision but prodigy gets this decision we have no idea what will happen to us,' so they use legislative shortcut. (it takes years to go thru courts)
it doesnt matter the complexities of their business model. it doesnt matter if they do it for free. (like a zine). none of this extra stuff you are layering on top has any relevance to section 230.
but, suffice to say tweets are an ingredient in their business model.
How ironic, It's this kind of behaviour/talk that instigates censorships. Keep it civil in your discourse.
Your mileage may vary, but I can speak for myself and I’m comfortable with @rahaeli describing what I said as dumbfuck if that’s their opinion. I’d consider it uncivil if we started calling *each other* dumbfuck.
"The idea Twitter is a common carrier is completely ridiculous"
Why?
Common carriers transport goods or people for set rates.
Social media sites do not transport anything - any “transport” that occurs is done by the ISP.
And social media sites don’t charge you. Again, that would be your ISP.
Indeed. But social media platforms do curate, promote/demote, publish and censor, just like publishers do, just at much greater and more indiscriminate volume.
Love to be wrong on the internet, and Twitter says that’s cool when they want to algorithmically elevate it, but also not okay if it’s a kind of wrong they care about moderating!
So thanks, but I didn’t make any of the arguments addressed by that article.
May I ask you, in a more polite way, how exactly you’re reading what I said? What is it you think I’m arguing here?
Why don’t you simply stop adjudicating fights, midwit
adjudicating content on social media is the social media equivalent of apple geniuses having to clean semen off customers' macbook keyboards.
it's part of the job but ain't the reason most people signed up for.
There's large evidence of hysteria at Meta Platforms headquarters in Menlo Park the day after the election because Facebook employees thought they failed with the world. Mark literally gave a day off for stupid woke employees because they were crying.
What I’m getting from this is “since were in charge you must behave or we will censor you”
This is exactly the problem. They are providing a service to users… the users may be their product, but it should not feel like we are servicing them… understand that this may be my idealism
Great common sense.
Yes and Yes. @yishan misses what you are saying about how/why things get heated, but he is spot on about what happens when they are too hot. The algorithms try to be hot enough to get clicks, but not too hot to cause conflict irl.
Your not going to have ad view if twitter turns into 4chan
So frukking true. Users shouldn’t have been allowed to enter and feel they’ve arrived to the the main & central arena. This is where social media firms got it all wrong.
This is called talking past the sale that you are soo objective
I imagine @ekp probably has a very similar viewpoint
Lol that’s why zuckerberg donated 250mm to the Democratic Party .. yea you’re part of the problem also
this completely obscures outrage-driven engagement metrics
I mean, that's fair.
EXACTLY. If they weren’t making money off of us, they wouldn’t care AT ALL. But they need to keep us happy, because if we start leaving the platforms, bye-bye advertising $$$
Bingo
There is no common sense, no common courtesy, no compromise. No real awareness that freedom is not the ability to go to war. Every. Single. Day. It is exhausting. A poor use of the internet.
Missing are two important actors A) engagement optimization algorithms that trigger our amygdala and bypass our cerebral cortex, elevating emotional content (e.g., rage). B) coming soon: massive scale AI-generated bots (text, faces, images). World-scale A/B testing of A+B =?
The first bit for SURE! He leaves the: „we like you engaged, so we try to trigger you“ bit put.
Though since I do not use FB, I have to say I can easily deal with that bit on Twitter. I am not sure who is more at fault: the trigger or the triggee.
Bullshit. They make additional revenue from the eyes that controversy draws. Who are you lying to here? ๐คฆโ๏ธ๐
absolutely absurd thing to say post 2016. the companies aren't ideological, sure, they don't really care whether their engagement is driven by the Right or the Left, but they're not forum moderators trying to keep the peace. they're trying to maximize engagement.
provocative content is more engaging, so they love when users post inflammatory stuff. the algorithm eats it up. compared to facebook and modern twitter, reddit was not as algorithmed, but you did still have the hot page, and you saw these patterns there too.
if you just wanted people to get along, why have "sort by controversial"?
Because that's what the people wants. Boring brings no purpose to life for the everyday civilians on Twitter.
I follow a few twitter employees and they’re some of the worst offenders ๐ come on. This is idealism not reality
Sounds like building a boxing gym and being mad people aren’t composing haikus in it.
It is the nature of a social network to be a bellum omnium contra omnes
That’s the rub isn’t it: they don’t care. They have the power to make the world utopian or dystopian, make lives better or worse, but they don’t care—they put the bare minimum effort in, which PERPETUATES the very thing they want to stop. It’s like throwing water on an oil fire.
pretty bad take on multiple counts:
-the left is frustrated at the pace/inaction of content curation but don't believe censorship is skewed against them
-Elon is not some web dinosaur pining for 4chan moderation. he knows exactly what he's dog-whistling and who it appeals to
-ironically your opinion on social media is borne of an older, Reddit-adjacent era (where most high-traffic interaction is civil and self-segregated communities usually don't mix). now, esp. on Twitter, 'squabbles' and controversies are a fundamental driver of the platform
-i mean, e.g., the entire modern conservative media/messaging ecosystem is built around 'owning the libs'. Twitter is structurally perfect for and in large part depends on these kinds of interactions on all sides, up to and including a culture of shit-talking and harassment
-jack is also the guy with a shielded safe room bc he thinks you can consciously feel cell-frequency radiation. can't pin that on the stress of running a company. idiocy is idiocy and that kind of shit is *so* counterfactually idiotic it's hard to him seriously on anything.
etc.
How do you explain this? ๐ and the supposed “volunteer” mods getting paid outside of reddit for favored content moderation? If you’re gonna talk about truths I rather you talk about truths and not corporate “half truths”.
Seems to me that the solution is in this statement
Easy solution: replace all the real users on your social network with bots
*Then just stop doing it.*
I think this is true, but as evidence of how blind the kind of people that get hired in big tech are to social science. None of the "features they want to write" exist in a social/ethical vacuum.
to a great extent and in an ideal world this could be true, except that some of these big tech (as organisations - not necessarily the people) don't mind a bit of chaos if it leads to engagement and visits.. sigh
Errr
That may be what they want in theory.
But in practice financial stakeholders want engagement, because that's how they get revenue.
And so the algorithms that drive social media, even if they're content neutral tend to look for high engagement, and controversy is that.
I agree with nearly all of this thread, but when the basic architecture of social networks maximizes engagement above all else, people motivated by terrible incentives get the largest microphones. *We need to invest in algorithmic/structural solutions to this problem.*
Elon is just a big self amusing troll who manipulates social media to make more money
...that was a long run just to slide into a Principal Skinner "no, it's the *children* who are wrong" meme
Not possible.
Users of Computer Mediated Communication aren't "squabbling over stupid shit". We're just interacting... with a *much* wider and less bubble-selected group of people than we ever could before.
Disagreements are inevitable.
[ Source: been on Usenet since 1983 ]
I like this take!
Speaking from a marginalised perspective, I sincerely hope you end up with “stupid little fights” affecting your life since you insist they’re so trivial.
Novel idea- they don't need to adjudicate any of the fights.
Stay tf out of it.
Actually that's a lie. They would all like to collect more personal info to shove more ads into more places. That's all. They would all like to collect as much as possible, email content, messages, chats, phone number etc.
You are missing the point bro. We don't want or need your adjudication so just crack on with your features. If someone complains about some content send them a page with a "Delete your account" button. Free speech means the right to say stuff some people won't like.
Nonsense. Twitter doesn't roll out new features. Users see little difference in TWTR today vs 2012.
@jack calls the dialog here his garbage bin and TWTR protects anon/bot crap-posting accounts that could *easily* be cleaned up w/human verification.
TWTR throttles politically, too
I’d like to frame this tweet so that I can send it to out over and over again
Do you think deleting the comments within the comments feature would benefit Twitter users? I think that’s where most of the drama and discourse happens. It’s endless and consuming. Oftentimes you can’t even see the original tweet that led to it all.
What features - how to better target ads to the user? How to better sell user data?
Great thread. Would be nice if @elonmusk read it. So much of these Twitter debates is just culture war nonsense. Both sides think they are unfairly treated and both sides are usually wrong. Twitter dosen't need "saving."
Yep. That's basically it. It is a COLOSSAL waste of time. Stupid fights go on and on and on. ๐ In the end, websites have to apply rules to both parties bc unless you're in the fight, there's no way to tell who is the aggressor and who isn't. They're both aggressors.
Who asked anyone to adjudicate in the first place?
(Spoiler alert: advertisers or company staff trying to create an environment friendly to advertisers)
Very true, this is how product builders feel.
Though I do wish we could *also* spend more time+brains trying new features that reduce drama by design (rather than by adjudication so often).
Do you think better/more flexible product design could reshape the battleground?
Then stop enforcing it
They only care about this as far as it affects US politics...
I’m not sure about this particular premise. It might be true if user squabbles didn’t constitute so much engagement. But we live in such a divisive culture that even the wedge salad has unironically become a wedge issue.
vice.com/amp/en/article…
So it’s hard to believe that tech platforms think of the squabbles (of which this thread is a part) as just users arguing over stupid shit. Too much space on these platforms is spent hosting “squabbles over stupid shit” for people to think they aren’t actively promoting drama.
They never had to adjudicate anything...
We need more Daoists on moderation teams
The various algorithms and social networks LOVE squabbling and drama it is their bread and butter. Higher engagement and keeps people coming back
I agreed... until this. Yeah no, we have evidence that "The Algorithm" is incentivized to promote engagement. What promotes engagement the most? To quote Randall Munroe: "Someone is *wrong* on the Internet."
No. The machine must churn. If they are true media.
Tom from MySpace got out at the right time
I suspect social media platforms love these stupid little fights, these constant moments of outrage. It generates traffic. Just like dating apps don't really want you to find a life partner. It's bad for busines.
This sounds great but they don't spend all their money on resources to address this problem so acting like they'd be making new features if they weren't too busy is hilarious
They have a right to not get involved and just keep writing features.
Damn. I had to scroll so far to find somebody with some sense.
As they say in my country: tough shit. Elon and all the rest can deal with the consequences of both sidesing maga filth.
untrue. These social media algorithms have been found to incentivize people to remain on their respective platforms for as long as possible. Oftentimes, algos steer users to controversial topics in order to keep them hooked. Conflict creates engagement which = more ๐๏ธs on ads
Why do you think this is true? They want users on their platform arguing because that's time spent on the platform, engagement, and views. All things advertisers pay $$$ for. This is what they want; more people doing more things = more $.They already don't adjudicate fights...?
They would like you (the users) to stop squabbling over stupid shit and causing drama so that they can spend their time writing more features and not have to adjudicate your stupid little fights.
That ๐ is the best conclusion I have seen so far in the tech threads.
They don't have to adjudicate anything. They can just let the people talk.
The squabbling is the important part. The battle for logic and how/what/to who it's spoken obviously matters more than nerdy tech add-ons.
Who decides what’s stupid shit?
If the rule is complete free speech, no ref, then you don’t have to ajudicate anything? I don’t believe the ‘fire scream in a building’ applies online. Words are not violence and digital text is even less so. Why not be like the telephone company? And tweets aren’t death threats.
They/you don't have to adjudicate, thats the point. There is in fact no actual problem other than of you're own making so.
All thats necessary is to allow ANYTHING except where a court order take down has been issued.
Wtf - talk about elitist.
The whole point of the public Sqaure is for us (users) to have a place to discuss and debate our "stupid shit"
@elonmusk pls fire them all
If that were true, they simply wouldn't be involved in our little fights. They would stay out of them and just be a platform.
But they are always involved in our little fights.
By contradiction, your assessment is not correct.
But doesn’t that drama mean more “airtime”, hence more revenue? I mean, isn’t the delta between incremental revenues (brought by drama) and incremental cost (incurred due to drama) still positive?
Interesting thread, but how can this point be true. Platforms are pushing silly culture wars in your face no matter how hard you try to avoid them. To NEVER EVER reply to some of the dumb stuff you scroll past is hard, and that's clearly by design. User count does the rest.
Disagree. They prefer you generate more conflict and thus more content. The more you engage the more time you see adverts
If that isn’t the truth I don’t know what is. Scrum masters and developers be like ๐๐๐.
Therein lies the problem. You don't need to moderate or police the squabbles. Stop encouraging users to run to mommy every time they read something they don't like. This is the problem with tech companies being run by immature idealogues.
They could just focus their time on writing more features and no adjudicating stupid little fights. No one is making them write “This tweet may contain sensitive content.” They are choosing to do that. They are choosing to engage in censorship. That’s the whole point.
Institutional biases aren’t the sum it’s of their policymaker’s personal biases.
๐ฏ๐ฏ๐ฅ
The employees anyway. No so sure about executives.
Not really. They just want to make more money off you. The don't exist for you, they exist BECAUSE of you.
You are very naive
They love the squabbles actually because they keeps the user engaged..
so ... there's no leftie social platform, no rightie social platform, just neutral? and Parler is a victim of its users?
๐ค
Hmmm. But don't most people come to social media to talk to one another and not to read features?
No because people leave those platforms because they no longer feel safe there and they become horrible places to be
Love it. Very good! +1
Is Zuckerberg human or machine? Or one of those lizard people?
Stopped reading here, this is one of the most embarrassingly wrong things ever thought out and tweeted
[ Squabbling generates creative content. So ultimately, they want to be the creators. They don’t really want users, they want readers, likes and RTers. That’s why they kept this text field limited. ]
Excuses are like a-holes, everybody has one and they’re all full of crap....outside of what’s actually illegal to publish, there is no reason to ‘adjudicate’ anything.
So they wanna write new features? Nice! What about the effect of the features they’ve already written? It’s > cultural perceptions of free speech at this point isn’t it? Innovation must be accountable. F*king over each other can’t be a business model. It’s pointless cycle.
Damnit Yishan, as a long time fan - I think you're completely wrong, or you're paid to be ignorant at this point.
Sorry, but this is full of crap. If they wanted, they would only ban stuff that is actually illegal, and not be shadow banning conservatives, or blocking a president that in no moment called for violence, while allowing actual terrorists in their platform.
Are you sure? Drama and stupid things seems to increase engagement. Even Twitter fell for that when they changed the timeline algorithm. I think social media have played a major role in forming this new hate/unable to see a problem for the other side culture. It's sad tbh.
Hey numbnuts. FYI treating moderation as a distraction from the task of designing a social media platform is how we’ve ended up in a world of resurgent fascism.
It’s the medias content that sparks/sparked it all.
to think any media outlet would move away from drama and fights is to not understand, media, human nature or social networks.
even fucking linkedin now attracts drama..
not a bug buddy boy.. its a feature!!
Social media are the big data companies. The more drama, the more data. We the users are not customers. We are the product. That's why I started to pay attention to Elon's TT takeover drama when he has mentioned subscription model.
And the edit button...
Uh no I disagree, it’s Twitter…..it started with people squabbling over stupid shit to themselves through tweets. That got boring. So then came hot takes and interactions. This is what keeping Twitter alive. They wouldn’t want you to stop tweeting.
I was with you until this. Engagement beats everything. More engagement creates more money. And heated discussions and stupid little fights create engagement. The incentives encourage a platform to create a place for those little fights.
Elon does not fuck (this was unpolite and not very nice to women ;) he contributes to the repopulation of the ("western" site of the) planet. ;)
The problem is who decides what is stupid or harmful or mean. Censorship will always be a subjective solution. Twitter, like most platforms, applies their rules of use subjectively. Bad online behavior can be addressed with more objective, universal constants.
Yes, it's exhausting to see cool tech platforms that connects us all just getting fucked up by trolls, hackers and fundies. Nothing worse than developing something fun, and immediately having policies and security layers and gloomy spectre of policing it overshadow everything.
Hmm Jaron Lanier would disagree, arguing their business models rely on exactly this. And I agree.
What a terrible take. Social media loves that users write features for them! It’s free. And the more people argue the more they are obsessed with these platforms, using them more and then generating more money for the company. Such wrong simplicity here, turning it on the user.
Erm, don't they outsource content moderation? (to lowly paid half-wits with biases?)
This is mostly nonsense. Musk is not a serious person and he has not made a serious offer.
You are being grotesquely dishonest and it's obvious. Most of the political money from social media goes to democrats. Many of the higher ups have stated "They wish the dems understand they are trying to help them". Lefties are openly supporting censorship. Stop Lying.
You are a woke person, not an awake one!
.. Sorry but you are
You earned a follow.
I was on Reddit once, mostly as a lurker, with some commenting. I was relentlessly attacked one evening by a pack of jackals (my guess is they were incels). I withdrew my account and am still recovering as well.
I’d like to add that culture hasn’t just moved onto social platforms. But social platforms have allowed for a condensed/distilled/concentration of various, once obscure, cultures and made them easily accessible to all. Hence the proliferation of ideas such as incel-ism.
Why can't they be like Craigslist?
I would like to read a separate thread about this Tweet specifically
๐
running a social network where u rescued censorship from religious right Wing ,its possible YOU r the one that doesn’t see things clearly..?Running an asylum/prison doesn’t give u more objectivity/In fact if U took over from people who mistreated inmates u may be really off farm
your reddit is showing
Similar to being Founder and CEO of PayPal... I suppose that had nothing to do with internet culture... At all. No examples... ;)
Making reusable fucking actresses/singers? That's impressive.
Normal people say „making love to“
This is probably one of my favourite parts of this novel
I followed most of your arguments as well argued , but this was cheap. Sadly it totally undermines any argument you mar because it betrays that it’s personal to you
Agree.. it is so hard to run it. I used pluspora, at the beginning I was even thinking about running my own server. As an IT related person it is not hard technically, but running with social media on it is really hard..
โค๏ธ๐ง
and harder yet when reddit is your claim to fame
Personal Character assassination ALERT ๐จ
And after all that peeps are still using sm platforms, but then I guess we can suss and police ourselves without you’re take on it
There is no excuse he knows what he is doing. The thing is the right wing politicians are drooling at the thought of Elon taking over Twitter because they want trump reinstated. As you point out free speech is a good thing until it just isn’t . Hence why he got banned itfp
This is it. This is the tweet. I’m deep into your thread and this is where you proved you are plugged in. You are a verified rock star and an instant follow. โญ๏ธ ๐๐ฏ
๐คฃ after reading this one, and I bet that was @elonmusk's response too.
I was with you until the petty comment about actresses/singers. Lost my respect now.
so true, everyone who was online then bought bitcoin fr
Elon late to bitcoin has got to be the weakest proof ever, lol. Thus the all caps.
This tweet reminded me of this trait
Former FBI agent of 21 years: These are the 8 biggest 'warning signs' that reveal a dishonest person
Every person has a tell. Your friends, co-workers, family members, partner and boss may actually be revealing their true intentions, but shrouding them in clever disguises.
cnbc.com
Elon had bitcoin for a long time, he just only recently bought it for Tesla
assuming this isnt an outright lie because you're invested in crypto, this is a false memory probably coming from your own biases. even on your website there were subs like buttcoin, actualmoney, circlejerk, circlebroke and subredditdrama were full of people making fun of bitcoin
they have, of course, been correct the whole time. bitcoin has never been useful to society or fit for purpose as a currency, it has only been profitable for investors
This argument is flawed. And sound more like a bitcoin ad than actual data
Love this thread, but this particular point is weak
If you were younger and plugged into Web3, you’d see that pseudonymous profiles help solve BOTH problems!
You can’t discriminate against me OR whip up a cancellation mob because you don’t know my name, race, gender, nationality or any protected characteristic.
Just my ideas.
Not only that but you CAN see my on-chain history, so I can’t conceal what I’m buying or selling.
One common thing I’ve seen on crypto twitter rug pullers is that they do NOT have a primary wallet hooked up to their account as a hexagonal NFT profile pic.
Yup - otherwise he would have known how much energy Bitcoin mining requires before flip flopping about it
Late to Bitcoin? Lol. Dude he effin created it lol.
lol. "late to bitcoin"
Dunno. That seems like a stretch.
Yea this statement shows somewhat of a blindspot bias and nearly renders the rest of thread void. Maybe you’re too plugged in to entitled techie culture to see some of the false underlying premises placed before you by those that control the flow of energy, information n currency
What?
Late to Bitcoin but pioneered the mass adoption of online payment methods before Bitcoin was twinkle in Satoshi’s eye. Keep in mind he was a whale to BTC when the time was right.
Elon knew about bitcoin from its existence. He has to act dumb around it on purpose though. He a computer coder genius in C++ hint hint
Sound logic is not your strong suit.
That one issue doesn't really indicate Elon is clueless about the internet in general. But good try with ALL CAPS. I'm sure some easily-fooled people found it persuasive.
I stopped reading when you said last year is considered “late to #btc” Many people said the same around 4K ๐
RIP to all of us that sold all their Bitcoin before Elon got into it
Thiel seeded Ethereum, Einstein. Whutchu think you're the only one with an internet connection.
You don't know. You strongly presume.
so i clicked this tweet to see the replies and it’s filled with elon fanboys screeching about how wrong you are. it is hilarious that people can’t just let one comment slide.
Well, THAT's quite a leap...
Started off ok, but swerved way out of control
Buttcoin, you say?
Great thread until the bitcoin drop ๐
I was in Bitcoin from the beta and I still think @elonmusk has a better grasp of this topics than you do…
Plus PayPal is the most archaic internet experience on planet Earth.
This is bs. Theres loads of "oldies" still not into crypto.
So true ahahahahaha
He still post memes that look like they’re from the app iFunny ๐๐
finest statement so far.
Lol. Imagine what his actual plan is? You probably can’t, because everything you say is from inside your existing world view. Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see a clear pattern ie this is not how he works.
#mips. Since 1995.
Ok done. Can’t read anymore. Dude you ramble to much.
It took a turn after MySpace. But if @elonmusk is taking a alt middle approach to embracing free speech then he’ll have to implement fair limits. But the change in the internet provided alternative areas of the internet for the culture to express themselves
It is so unclear why you think this, other than from Elon’s age.
Additional commentary: I, and certainly most I know, dont think either of the extremes you outlined earlier. Most ppl are not radical.
Besides that, thoughtful and thought provoking thread. Thank you.
I suspect Elon Musk rejects your 'culture' and substitutes his own. I know I do.
Messed up.
Nonsense.
@elonmusk memes.
What other evidence do you need?
Lol. Cancel culture.
Elon doesn’t know? Biggest statement I’ve heard this year.
I'm sorry but Elon is vaguely left leaning? What world are you living in? He crushes unionization, doesn't care about cruelty to animals, allows outspoken racism within Tesla.
Yes, I am sure the multi-billionaires tech bros are "vaguely left-wing". From your right-wing perspective.
precurser-Gen X/genTech here.
Bring back mods.
That is all.
Nah free speech is free speech. Want to talk about white nationalism openly
They can’t moderate because they should be able to plan a coup, it’s free speech. If the coup succeed, it’s their fault they shouldn’t have let bad actors use their platform to organize a coup. ‘They’ have to fix all the internet problems.
I think both of these things are true.
Left-wing, but my take is that those guys are firstly in for the money, so their position is to try to appeal to everyone.
But also there's a lot of people here. That's a lot of tweets to check, and unemployment still being a thing, I doubt they have the manpower required.
I really don’t tho.
See, while you're right about confirmation bias.
But the left doesn't just have examples. Systemic decisions have come to light from refusing to deal with white supremacist movements because that net would catch republican politicians.
There's also scholarly research on/1
double standards in moderation harmful to minority groups, whereas the same isn't true for harming conservative groups.
You're right moderation is hard, but that doesn't mean that we should ignore structural disparities because the "other side" claims the opposite. /2
That's golden mean fallacy.
We should go where the evidence says and if one side is shown as preferred by the evidence then their demand is for one of more preferred treatment.
Overall an insightful thread though.
(And I'm willing to cite what I'm referring to on request)/fin
except the 2d thing isn't true. SV isn't left wing. but (most) of the executives are men. that's statistically provable. "woke" is an ambiguous concept that can't be proved in the same way, and "left-wing" means workers own the means of production. how many SV coops are there lol
People thinking this way are thinking in distortions and memes - they are not a solid basis for decision making that affects political fora like Twitter. Self adjudication is the only way forward that will work - nothing is removed.
Im neither left or right. What all collectivists (nazis, socialists, communists, etc) have in common, is they despise freedom and individualism. As long as a majority of collectivists are allowed to rule, we are doomed.
Both are true. The former is good, the latter is bad. Easy peasy.
Garbage take.
My political alignment is as follows with this flow chart.
Point is, agreeing to terms of service means you follow them and any new rules added to those terms. It’s legally binding so nobody has a right complain about being censored when they violate a platform’s TOS.
I think both.
I think that ๐บ๐ฐ๐ถ think there is a magical division that leads to this false equivalency.
Both of these statements are true. The assumption that they are equivalent reveals the problem of the reader.
Couldn’t it be both, ex: top executives are men and left/woke ?
There isn't just a right or left. There's the traditional right and left... then there are the loonies on the far left. You know, the ones that don't know what a woman is and wanna teach sexually to a 5 year old.
They're the ones that wanna silence those they don't agree with.
Stop telling people what they think.
Neither sides, nor the center. What if one (user) is simply not interested in politics and is not american ๐ค how one can assimilate twitter' users to US citizens only or did I get it all wrong ๐ค
Neither, actually.
I don’t think you adequately understand the anger from the left. Reddit platformed hate. Facebook allowed the fomentation off an attempted revolution. If you want to be the institution that enforces free speech, you take up the responsibilities of the paradox of tolerance.
The inaction of the social media industry played a meaningful role in the attempted overthrow of the United States government. THAT is what the left is angry about. That the thing they warned you was the direct result of non-enforcement happened. Reddit was in the wrong.
Reading through this Twitter thread and your Omega Events thread it becomes clear that there was no hard look in the mirror. No question of whether you did something wrong at Reddit. No ponderance of guilt towards the past.
Social media companies have played the role of the manipulative sociopath in the new social construct of the internet. We were just in it for ourselves isn’t the defense that you think it is.
Without digging deeply into your reddit policies, this may be too harsh (or may not be harsh enough). And to be clear, I don’t believe I could do the job you did for a second. The issue I have is that you seem to want to harness society without responsibility to its wellbeing.
Come on. You don’t have to be partisan to see how insane and politically motivated (coerced by internal lobbying of activist employees) the Trump ban was. Censoring a political leader is a hugely antisocial decision they have stuck with. What is the equivalent for “other side”?
He retained his platform through innumerable rules violations and was finally banned after attempting a coup.
This is true but culture wars are a red herring. The real issue is “masks don’t work” and every other incarnation of The Only Truth. This is a government vs ppl issue, not a left vs right thing. But the only way you get freedom from govt censors is to let left and right go wild
Both sides think it and the detached assessment clearly identify the actual trend and where it may have been religious conservatives in the 90s you are lying to yourself if you feel it’s affects everyone .. it doesn’t. With all respect to your actual skin in the game experience
This doesn’t hold up to objective assessment rather than this diplomatic “take” it just doesn’t
Very wrong. The right gets censored over the most minor infractions. All big tech platforms the same. Sorry it abounds nice what you’re saying but factually untrue.
You're reaching for an equivalence here, comparing statements with very different levels of absolutism. Adjust the first one:
"The top executives and board members are *overwhelmingly* men"
That's a basic fact. The other one depends on semantics.
isn't arguing the facts of the matter. It's the political ideologues that rush in to assert "why." In the "too many men CEOs" example it's the left, and their "why" (misogyny) is wrong.
You really want to “both sides” Nazis and fascists and misogynists and anti-semites and homophobes and similar ilk using these platforms to promote their ideologies?
Sorry but that isn't true.
What major event has Twitter banned that the leftist supported? I can't think of a single thing.
In the last 2 years they have banned: lab leak theory, debate around masks, Hunter Biden laptop, etc.
(No comment)
“All extreme factions think X thing is not good, therefore X must be balanced.”
If that was your reasoning I can’t say that makes much sense.
Been here 30 years. It’s always been zealots cults both left and right. But all about weapons of technolization.
One of those things is demonstrably 100% fact though, and the other is almost certainly horseshit
Lol dude. Just lol
It is not a “conspiracy theory” the SV employees are left biased. It is a public fact
I think it's about whether or not you think they are trying to push an agenda. Just because execs and board members are male doesn't mean they're pushing male-biased policies. Just because SV emp are leftist doesn't mean they are pushing leftist policies.
I mean you can easily see this with Netflix drama on trans issue with the standup comedian, or Twitter employees throwing a fit when their ideology gets threatened. Not hard to double down on this assertion.
For the record I am not picking sides in either of these cases, but it is very obvious talent has a say in the company policy, especially when such talent is hard to replace. If 90% of your near impossible to rehire talent feels strongly about X, hard to go with X_bar.
Yeah true, i just think it's a bit more diverse in SV companies than you think. It's not all intensely left. I've known companies that struggled to retain trans/gay talent in SV because they are so conservative. Decent sized ones too, 5,000+ employees.
There are 12,000 full time netflix employees. If it was representative, about 6,000 would be leftist, and some of those would be more extreme. To have a couple hundred people protest makes sense??
FYI retaining quality trans talent is also a business concern (beyond moral)
So let me get this clear. You think 90% of a company’s employees can feel very strongly about sth, and company wouldn’t care when they devise their strategy regarding that topic? I don’t see how that can play out.
As you said keeping quality talent is very very important.
Let’s see the algos
What's your favorite recreational drug?
I am asking for a friend.
They wanna make sure they don't take the same stuff.
Cool story bro... I wish I live in your delusional world it's probably a good time lol
Then where is the outcry from the left to depart from the status quo? Oh yeah that's what I thought. This is an incredibly asymmetrical enforcement issue and you know it
Could you provide an example of sharing a major news outlet's article about Trump got someone banned or shadow banned? For example there was an Atlantic article citing hearsay that Trump talked poorly on dead soldiers. Did people get banned for sharing that?
Meh, this is a “both sides are bad” type take. Twitter is clearly left leaning. Freedom of speech does work because it allows ALL sides to be heard and gives users the opp to make their own decision. We don’t need our overlords to tell us what is permissible to read,but thanks
It's been such a long time since I've a heard a good old-fashioned take on media and culture from a 90s techie like Brad Pitt on meth speaking in my ear
Really? You don't think an unbiased measure would have it one way or the other, at least slightly?
Where is the data though? I don't think the left is getting suspended for nearly as petty reasons, but I don't have data to back that up.
If the left think twitter is biased against them… why are they the ones collectively losing their shit about the idea of elon ‘opening up the site’. The right is happy about less moderation, the left isnt..this should tell you everything. The left know twitter is on their side!
You do know we can still go see the opinions on the posts that haven't been removed and have no opposing replies right? You can even still see replies that look like people are debating with no one because the post they were replying to was removed.
You are completely blind or completely misleading to argue that both sides are equally censored.
These people need to spend more time irl.
Both sides, interesting perspective. Focus on the hypocrisy - I’m sure @seanmdav @ScottAdamsSays @SethDillon @MartinKulldorff @DrJBhattacharya and others can illustrate it for you. Suppression of information.. selective algorithms.. “accidental” suspensions.. @elonmusk gets it
BREAKING: Libs of TikTok has been suspended from Twitter again. This time for "abuse and harassment." Here's the notice and a message from @libsoftiktok:
"Both sides think the platform is institutionally biased against them.
"All the top executives and board members are men.""
Been a while since I've heard anything as stupid as left wing men on the board is biased against left.
I sympathise with the impulse to try to find centre ground, and recognise neither 'side' is blameless, but surely it's not debatable what the political bias of Silicon Valley is. Have you seen that video of the Google meeting after Trump was elected? Come on.
That’s because it is. The establishment has a bias toward centrist liberalism, and against the left and right.
Actually, I think it’s biased against ordinary users in favor of bluecheck “influencers”. Bluecheckers must commit many egregious violations & have a groundswell against them to get banned. Meanwhile, Tweet 1 got me 7 days in Twitter jail, while Tweet 2 got that account banned.
Respect your fair insight but as a "right-winger" can't keep myself from not making this remark: majority of Silicon Valley Woke, that also means many men CEO's in the majority also Woke. The left complaining that those Woke CEO's are men, but still they are Woke, we complain ...
...we complain that Majority of Silicon Valley woke, including those bord of directors that are majority men. The left has no reason to complain about Silicon Valley being Woke. So Still, feel the right is in a worse position based on this alone, leave all other things.
Also damn it what's with this trend of not being able to see replies? Both twitter and Facebook. Youtube not able to see dislikes. These platforms make me feel like an old grandpa that can't figure out how things work. I can't even see my own reply to your tweet. This is bs.
That’s why he is looking to reduce enforcement… nobody should feel any degree of intimidation if they want to say something that is within the confines of law
It’s such a simple but important observation. In his TED talk it also becomes apparent when pressed on this very practical problem, Elon has no perfect answer (he’s saying it), cuz there is none.
twitter.com/bast_i/status/…
I was curious what @elonmusk position is on free speech and the changes he has in mind for twitter, given he wants to take it private. I’m glad we got answers.
LIVE: Elon Musk Gives TED Talk in Vancouver
(Apr. 14) Watch live as Elon Musk speaks at a TED conference in Vancouver, Canada, on Thursday, April 14, 2022.Musk offered to take Twitter Inc. private in a...
youtube.com
this is pretty rich from the guy who let r/jailbait exist
I couldn't but notice, for all your attempts at finding balance, your use of the 'woke' label on one side but no such labels on the other
They aren’t errors. There have been coordinated efforts across different institutions to control society and influence elections.
How can you be so disingenuous?
They literally admitted it themselves.
And we all know which side is doing it the most, it’s not even close.
Seems pretty easy to draw a line at violent hate speech or allusions to genocide, ethnic or racial cleansing, etc.
you should read the rest of the thread
I did, I just think this is all we need to restrict. Violent rhetoric. Anything else is just opinion. I agree with the thread largely.
You’ve clearly never been a woman on Twitter. Or, alternatively, known what women on Twitter go through.
The single most determinate cause of this seems to me to be centralization and standardization, necessary for scale but usually toxic to the well managing of an online forum, where moderation is usually at its best when its nuanced to the point of bespoke
How does <insert any SMN here> fix the AI issues for actual bad-faith enforcement (ie bot swarm reporting of a tweet against Russian disinformation)?
I think the emphasis on poor Ai models making decisions is overplayed. Reality is more like poor people making minimum wage piecework rates are tasked with making split second decisions about content against some rubric. They're just trying to keep their own rank high.
Google uses services to rank websites Meta does for porn and violence issues. Why wouldn't they use them for other situations?
The takeaway is that the platforms should stop "enforcement". The best enforcement is the block button, nothing more than that is necessary.
You seem to have forgotten that twitter completely changed their retweet functionality to stop the spread of certain specific stories in the lead up to the election and that censorship only went one way. Libtards pointing to pictures of Hitler was 15 likes does not equate to this
I really wish I could believe you, but until I see someone on the right fight as hard for SWers on social as actual leftists do, I can't lol.
False equivalency. Like a motherfucker.
You can’t treat hate speech the same as “woke” speech. Nobody is harmed if everyone is nice to each other: please compare that situation to ACTUAL FUCKING NAZIS.
You haven’t come right out and said it, but it seems clear you wish to deny that leftist extremism has been the dominant mode for sometime. Right extremists exist, of course, but their numbers and their influence are diminutive in comparison.
Thats what bothers me about bothe sidesism. Until 2016 I was considered a liberal. I was worried about what I saw with an increasing bias against right wing view points, and being the free speech guy that I am, defended there speech, and that landed me with the conservative label
Non-appealable rules are bad. Plain and simple. Always have been. Always will be. Automating such rules further exacerbates problems inherent in them. This makes the use of these algorithms central to the conversation about free speech, not a side issue as you frame it.
Clearly you did not watch Musk's TED talk about this yesterday. He discusses these exact things, saying that we need to know WHY either side is censored, while one is not. The blackbox algorithms being used are the enemy. That's what they are scared of having exposed.
How about Hunter Biden Laptop??? Photo of trump head in a comedian hand ? People that thought virus came from wuhan lab? Early treatment conversations ??? That’s ok to censor ??
Is enforcement hard though? I mean when someone says “I’m a Nazi! I hate ni**rrs” it’s pretty easy to identify and ban them. Yet it was allowed to happen so much, especially in 2016-2020.
There sure is; it's bit me 7 times since the Pandemic started.
Do you know what I like about this? That you have friends on both sides, and acknowledge the flaws and perceptions of both in an open fashion.
This is so vitally essential toward understanding and growth, as I see it - we have been so polarized, we have forgotten how to listen.
CC: @K_Bigbee for so many reasons.
Suspending @nypost for reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop or banning of @zerohedge for reporting on the possibility of COVID being leaked from a lab are not unintentional mistakes of well intentioned enforcers.
Twitter employees’ reactions tells you everything you need know
Neither side is lying. But the systemic biases are only one-way and against the conservative side.
No, primarily it is of far left liberals in charge of what can and can't be said. You putting "each side" on equal footing as who is censoring who is intellectually dishonest and you know it.
really, where is this list of Leftists banned from the platform for their posts?
Doesn't exist, and you know it.
This is a problem for sure
That was awesome! Thank you for your valuable insights and your sage advice to Elon. Intuitively, this makes sense. Given the nature of humanity, creating a “perfect” Twitter is a task beyond going to Mars.
Free speech. No matter what. No enforcement and leave it at that. If that’s the rule, then no one can complain..?
Not errors. Twitter literally strong arms elections and is complacent in hate speech as long as it's anti white and to a lesser extent anti Asian. They don't hide it. They don't address it.
This speaks to me
Show some examples of the left being silenced or deplatformed en masse the same way the right has been. I mean, they banned trump from twitter for gods sake.
SM platforms use REAL PEOPLE to train their AI so please don't blame the algos. The bias is real.
enforcement is hard? who cares, dont enforce. let nazis spread hate on twitter.
I can attest to this! However, what a blessing it has been….
Yes but moderators do it too. The vendors (Accenture now, Cognizant previously) have poor communication with the client. The people holding direct impact on decision of moderation are poorly paid and have low education/IQ Levels. I've been there...
The algorithms (and lack of meaningful appeal) are a significant part of why people (mis)perceive that Twitter enforces a political agenda. But lots of suspensions are simply stupid mistakes.
The bigger issue is the biz model of FREE.
This is too bad -- but one result of the world of FREE!, where none of us is a customer, but a supplicant & eyeballs to be sold to vendors.
Twitter ridiculously suspended me for days "targeted abuse+harassment" for saying metaphorically we had to "punch Putin in the nose".
Enforcement is hard, yeah, but I firmly believe it's a solveable problem without censorship. And, I think, so does Elon.
The AI models don't MAKE the judgments. They enforce the cultural and political biases of those in power. People at Twitter set the parameters, and they apply to the whole world across geographic and political borders.
This is what is happening on Tiktok
2nd request here for story ๐๐ฟ
I understand your point, but the error trend is always wider on the other side of the fashion crowd. For instance, the BLM did as they pleased while anyone speaking against the stupidity of it all got their accounts immediately suspended.
easy, the POTUS 45 is banned.
Twitter Suspends LibsofTikTok For Featuring Liberals Talking About Themselves?
Twitter Suspends LibsofTikTok For Featuring Liberals Talking About Themselves?
What is interesting about this latest move is that it lacks even the pretense of neutrality...
zerohedge.com
....mmmyess, but keep in mind that left-wingers are confronting survival and right-wingers are confronting inconvenience. (eg. BLM vs Freedom Convoy)
Well I'm a centrist (Macron FTW) and I think social media is biased against right-wing thought fwiw
Libertarian here. I honestly do not see any "woke" agenda or anything immoral in Twitter booting people like trump off their site. I really can't think of a single example where I stood against a platform ban.
Why do you have friends who are right-wingers and libertarians?
The big issue is when outcomes of presidential elections are swung due to a lack of free speech. A prime example is hunters laptop, that was a big conspiracy and accounts that mentioned it were banned. Now it's no conspiracy, and had the truth been told, Biden wouldn't be potus
i have one in my inbox.
"Wow, I can't believe Twitter banned me! I advocated for punching Nazis, post-birth aborting their children with a knife, freezing their bank account, confiscating & euthanizing their pets, burning their house down!"
Cyberassist200 on IG helped helped me unbanned my account
Don’t trust any comments here i have been scammed twice ๐ฉ๐ฉ if you need help write to EVAN_HACKS on instagram he is an unban pro. he fix mine
Nope… you’re reaching and headed off the rails.
Some people have verifiable proof, but their opponents are CONVINCED! They are the same.
...do they tho?
Uh please. No one is being banned on twitter for asking questions. “Questioning the woke orthodoxy”? Who is being banned for that?
Ah, the beautiful symmetrism of your post - obviously it doesn't touch on the fact that libertarians and right-wingers are convinced that free speech is the ability to defame or cuss or just be extremely nasty to others without consequences.
hey manager guy I know you've talked yourself into this but
we know whose speech leads to most of the actual killing
your false equivalence is a boardroom evasion
you need different libertarian friends... (i.e., not the shadow-Republican kind)
You have alt right friends?
Why do you have alt right friends what the hell.
get better friends
lul
eth in profile, checks out
why do you have nazi friends
You have alt right friends??
To believe your argument we would have to assume social media CEOs are liars. As Twitter's former CEO admitted they are left-leaning and even said they didn't have many conservative employees at all. It's not crazy right-wingers saying this.
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey: I ‘fully admit’ our bias is ‘more left-leaning’
Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey said on Saturday that he “fully admit[s]” Twitter employees share a largely left-leaning bias after facing accusations that conservatives are disc…
thehill.com
This is key... we are all victims of our own algo pushing confirmation bias and ‘proof’ from AI or whatever. It’s like none of this is real and only those slow on the uptake still believe they have ‘proof they are right’
Been saying we are all being psyop’d for 2 years.
Libertarianism comes from liberty, so no, its not all the same. Censorship ALWAYS comes from central planning. So that leaves you with the left, and in some cases in history with the right. But the left has historically being overwhelmingly infringing over civil liberties.
You just confessed a lot
You have “alt right” friends?
Libertarians are generally pro BLM and LGBT+. I wouldn't conflate them with center-right just because they are pro guns and pro free market.
dude you need new friends
โค๏ธ
Na just disapointed that people are considered guilty before being proven guilty. We do a poor job of teaching civics today and that everyone’s innocent until proven guilty.
BLM/Marxist/White supremacists are really the same uncivil people with distorted worldviews. We should regard them as villains of decent society, not competing forces.
Well Trump is banned, and Joe Biden isn’t. You can call on death of Putin, but not Trudeau. There is only one view vaccines that is allowed and so. Saying that both sides are represented is garbage.
I suspect you have no alt-right friends, or even conservative acquaintances.
I can’t think of an example
I think the most obvious is Facebook banning people for sharing pictures of nipples.
You are making excellent points, but undermining them by referring to progressives as “woke”
Good thread. The problem is the conflation of censorship & editorial discretion. The Constitution protects free speech from government interference. It doesn’t mean that the editors/producers at the NYT : Fox have to pub/air my views.
I mean… I think I qualify but no I don’t have any examples. Mostly cause I just don’t think any sort of crack down has enough systemic importance to catalogue examples of it, but I’m sure it’s happened.
I was once banned for calling insurrectionists "rednecks".
I JUST WISH THAT ALL OF YOU WILL STOP MIS-CHARACTERISATION OF THE WORLD "WOKE" AS IT PERTAINS TO PEOPLE WHO THINK YOU SHOULD BEHAVE PROPERLY OR AT LEAST BE CONSIDERATE AND DEMAND TELLING THE TRUTH AS IT IS & TREATING PEOPLE EQUALLY -GENDER, RACE ETC. WHAT IS BAD IN THAT?????
I always presumed perhaps Twitter was censoring the left as well and it was just outside my visibility. HOWEVER, when I go to neutral sites like Hacker News, that's not how the comments come out statistically. The left there complains about not enough censorship, not too much.
They have zero examples of themselves being censored.
Lost my account because I tweeted about a UFC fight. Lost it for inciting violence. Lol. Like I was inciting the UFC fight.
๐คฆโ๏ธ
name a single left of center figure of any prominence who has been banned from social media
I’d like to see those screenshots bc I’ve never seen a time where a big tech company upheld racist views over woke views (false dichotomy)
Ha. Yeah, I wish it really was equal treatment of censorship but it is very lopsided.
I have worked in the moderation of top social media leaders. Can't name (maybe after 5 years). I think the way they moderate content has to be exposed. It's the most ridiculous, unstructured process I've seen in my life. My ex colleagues agree too ... Policies changed every week
what examples are there of woke people being censored on Twitter and right wing going free for doing the same thing?
How many of these have been deplatformed?
Ok you lost me at saying left-wing woke. Using woke to signify someone's position on social issues is dismissive, and pushes a false ying-yang narrative of "extremism on both sides"
His comment went right over your head
Examples please....
This is false equivalency. How many sitting Democrat presidents have been deplatformed?
Though your meta point is still intriguing on the battle being against all sides.
Conservatives are the only ones who have to resort to 'shady' sources to get their news. This is because mainstream news is completely disconnected their observable reality and the 'shady' sources turn out to be right at least as often as the mainstream sources.
Not evidence for curbing their speech, unlike the others.
This is such an American take. Only in the US does socialism = gender/gay/reproduction rights.
Among the other 6Bn+ people these are Liberal values, important, but nothing to do with the Left, which is mostly about class/economics, things that are not discussable in the US.
I must live in a different world from the people who think Twitter's moderation has a right-wing bias.
Receipts.
Confirmed, there's plenty of evidence that supports this claim. A mountain of evidence.
They need to learn the difference between positive and negative liberty
Oh so you have woke "friends" ? How could that happen ?
How about being responsible as a social media exec? By this I mean simply being accountable for unacceptable content before users propagate info and behave badly. There must be principles and regulations (!) that stick (see Overton window) Boundaries and common sense matter.
If they'd read both sides and shut up their own haughty mind, they'd be happy for the internet again.
I've learned a few things that are good about both sides.
Don't listen to Bernie, Elizabeth and Robert Reich, though. They HATE Elon!
And this is how you say you're left wing without saying it.
And this is how you say you're right wing without saying it. He proved his point.
U don’t have any friends
They’re deluded
Americans stop conflating left wing with "wokes" challenge.
Wokes are NOT left wing.
in practical parlance it has become the same thing. The economic left wing have been completely silenced by the woke who replaced what "left wing" meant.
The working/middle class's struggle is on the bench. Intersectionality is the star player, now.
True works are the worst left wingers haven’t got off that cliff yet
Completely and utterly disagree. oops. your rant just became meaningless.
I'm left and spend my waking hours online. I have never, ever seen a woke account disciplined or muted.
Dozens (hundreds) of times I've witnessed slightly divergent thinking (as in, not right wingers) get censored.
Have often discussed this w/ lefty friends who feel the same.
You can find anything on the internet to support virtually and idea or philosophy that you have. It doesn't mean that any of them are true.
Your left-wing woke friends have evidence right wing types getting preferential treatment? Can you share 2 prominent left wing accounts with 50k followers who have been banned of Twitter I'll share 10
lol. Bruh. #1 calling someone woke (while harmless that it’s a very 2018 term and still highly overused) is the premise here. But to answer your unwoke (and highly divisive question) the 10 you feel are unjustly censored are lying or inciting violence. That’s just a fact. So…
I mean woke is still a term for a lot of the most lefties. Shouldn’t get equates to all left wingers they have some good ones that aren’t the low IQ crazy woke.
There are nasty little trolls from all walks of life
You missed two important dynamic: One, free speech for terrorists keeps resulting in mass murders motivated by social support on your platforms.
Two, for people to be free to speak, they must be free from bigotry on the platforms. When they aren’t, they leave & you become 4chan.
Twitter quashes provably true information, promotes provably false information and manipulates its users.
It is more than free speech. This is a propaganda machine and surveillance system.
Shut it down or clean it up.
Yishan, if all this was mostly about freedom of speech, that would be awesome, but freedom of speech under attack is just the canary in the coal mine... There's an elephant in the room, that elephant has a WEF Great Reset tattoo...
How about global nazism/communism?
Freedom of speech is a human right and there are no ifs and buts on human rights.-
Please make a new thread on this story. Ty.
You lost me here.
please tell this story
Same story. Can’t just ignore it. Part of mass communication
Hella paid posters astroturfing for Putin and Xi on reddit
But an extremely important one. Like other freedoms, freedom of speech can be abused, in this case by Russian trolls.
Russians don't have free speech, not in Russia. But their legions of paid trolls have free speech on American platforms, which they use to undermine America. I think that's what he's saying there.
Most people need to hear this story
would love a thread on this
More on this please
Been saying this for 15 years, ww3 will be on the web.
If disinformation is removed, along with the Russian fake accounts, people will get a much clearer picture of reality.
Not another - it’s practical, empirical experience, case!
War in Ukraine decides now how the world will look like next 100-200 years.
It’s not “another story.” It’s a main theme of “the story.” Along with your other fine points.
Facts.
You worked for Reddit and don't know that the whole Russian misinformation thing was found to be false? I mean as to reality, not as to MSDNC. Many anti-war progs out here, and we're not plants. That's why Dems will lose. Boogie men instead of accountability.
For many of us, it is the crucial story: how social media amplifies disinfo & psychological manipulation for profit, to the extreme detriment of democracy & benefit of rising fascism. How we preserve free speech in the face of essentially brainwashing. The RW/woke war means nada.
Dictators love free speech...
For only themselves.
This is also wrong. Information/Propaganda is not warfare. It's something to consider or ignore at your personal choice.
Tell the guy with his leg blown off that you should cut in line because you got propagandized. Everyone will scoff at you.
Russia was kicked out of the world economic forum... That says all I need to know
What even is this point?
same with our own campaigns targeted with ads
Then you're still fast asleep about how the world works... and you've been successfully social engineered by the western cabal et al(WEF spawns) to believe Russia man bad... YES, but Russia is in DEFENSIVE mode, whereas the opposing side(s) in OFFENSIVE mode. Let that simmer...
Nah. It's part of the same story. So are the holocaust deniers and the KKKers and all the other Nazis, not to speak of the continuing QAnon freakshow.
Do we really want a platform where they get free rein to spam everybody who doesn't like their limited world view?
Us? You got a mouse in your pocket? I didn't know you're Ukrainian.
I'm going to quit reading here. You slurped up the globalist propaganda.
Need this story too... ๐๐ฟ
Who's "us" in this assertion of yours?
Russia is not "using free speech". They use disinformation. Disinformation isn't free speech. It's a form of censorship: If you want people to stop drinking water you either turn it off (if you control the tap) or you pour a load of shit into the water supply (if you don't).
Of course, free speech is nothing without a free mind capable to critically interpret and assess information.
Wait what? No
But also this.
So censorship is bad when the right does it to entertainment, but not when the left does it to actual real world issues. Got it.
Sure, things are different now, but it's also worth noting that religious conservatives are currently lobbying to literally ban speech and remove books from libraries ... and winning. The targets may change but the concern is evergreen.
Ban speech?
You have pronouns in your bio.
You’re being forced into speech that you otherwise wouldn’t have felt forced to speak 5 years ago.
They are trying to ban the grooming of children. Not same.
Yeah hard disagree here.
Freedom of speech does not mean you cannot stand up to conservatives lobbying to remove Judy blume books from the library; it means you cannot stop them from sharing their views of why they are lobbying to remove Judy blume books.
Not every side. A number are moral in not resorting to demanding others be censored. We should recognize and call out censorious people as the bad actors they are.
This tweet received far fewer likes than the one that preceded it. This is where the division over communication starts in society.
"Every side?" Unbelievable
But woke fascists are never taken down. Only conservatives and sceptics of the accepted, allowed narrative. Obviously.
Incorrect. Nihilistic. Millions don't want to take free speech rights from anyone else. It's staggering that you don't know that this group exists. It's a minority sure, but the minority always drags the laggard majority, kicking and screaming into modernity.
This is where Yishan’s absurd thread betrays him. The only side whose speech Twitter has taken away is that of conservatives. Must not have been any no civics classes where Yishan was schooled.
Not correct, only collectivists try to take away free speech.
Agree
Wrong. There are many among us that don't want idiots to stop talking as they just incriminate themselves. I want really open conversation for everyone. Because I can make you look dumb when you are being dumb.
That’s just not true. One side is trying to take away freedom of speech and it is the left.
You couldn’t be more wrong. It’s laughable actually. Most conservatives I speak to want people they disagree with to be able to speak freely and say whatever the hell they want short of threatening another person or group with physical violence.
hol' up hol' up have you ever heard of Libertarians? Not everyone is trying to censor everyone. The main group rn trying to censor are establishment Democrats. When was the last time someone of any other political persuasion had any influence in banning or suspending on twitter??
This take sucks. Wtf are you rambling about?
That's absolutely not true.. not every side is trying to take the free speech of the other side. It's incredibly biased and one sided.. one side is trying to do anything they can to re.ove dissent and differing opinions to control the group narrative. It is not two sided at all.
Not true
Christian morality = bad,
Atheist morality = good
Not entirely true but…i’ll keep reading
Bullshit. No one but the left is trying to take away speech rights.
". . . every side is trying to take away the speech rights of the other side"
No, they're not. But many have the fantasy that that's how world works. It stems from nihilism coupled with endless victimhood.
This is 100% backwards. Every side should be trying to protect the rights of those they disagree with to have a voice. Having all ideas in the public sqaure is the only way to insure the best ideas can win.
Free speech + critical thinking = functioning democracy.
'standing up against EVERYONE' ๐
Now, that's a worthwhile endeavor, fuck 'm all.
Wrong. There is one group of people interested in deplatforming you entirely. The others just use the mute and block functionality like regular intelligent humans.
That’s not true but I imagine it looks that way to you. I’m a religious conservative and the more free-speech the better. That’s my opinion. If I shut down yours you can shut down mine, and I don’t want that.
False. Only leftist are trying to take away speech.
But I don’t agree. Conservatives don’t try to silence the left on the internet.
I agree to an extent but liberals are doing the most damage tenfold
So conservatives are the people banning books? Dems are doing none of that? ๐คช
Thats the dem playbook: say, hey look what republicans are doing-we don’t do that - ( we do more of that just pretend we don’t )
Not everyone. Certainly not the libertarians.
But when, as a moderator, you don't acquiesce to any sides, and let it run then that is free speech! You site runners love being able to pick who gets to talk!
Superfudge by bloom was one of my favorites as a kid.
Fuck that book. It spoiled Santa for me.
This is the worst part of your argument right here. Only one side is trying to take away the speech of the others.
Such utter bullshit.
This is not true, no true conservative or libertarian wants any speech infringed
It's the left that is doing this, not the right. The sides are not symmetrical.
It's simple, let everyone say anything and anyone say everything.
Social media (web2.0) is publisher.
Web 1.0 is mainly distributor.
Check the law.
Or no one is trying to take away free speech because only the government can do that.
No, generally the Right wants free speech for everyone. Projection.
Welcome to the world of democracy and human rights!
Standing up against EVERYONE is exactly how religious freedom works.
You either make sure NOBODY can be state religion (secular rule) or you get eternal WARS over who get to be state religion (catholics vs protestants etc)
The right doesnt openly lobby for censorship the way the left does.
Voila. ๐ฏ
Most people still don't realize that they're constantly being attacked and there is an information war being waged online. We will don't have the right defensive tools installed on our phones and computers.
Deep insight right here
I got this thread it’s interesting I meant to say check it out.
The main battlefield of our culture still remains in real life in most non western nations ( yes they do exist) & not on SM.
Not just culture, peoples life, literally! The fact that so many of the elites do not admit this or recognize it is troublesome
"Culture wars" are just as deadly as hot wars, thanks to hate criminals using the internet to amp up attacks on the rights of women and sexual minorities. Real people's lives are destroyed by neo-nazis allowed to invade & carpet bomb online spaces.
'The internet is not a "frontier" where people can go "to be free,"'
Stopped reading right here.
Brainlet take
So it should also, 'to be free', mean that I should be free to fight in that battle should I choose how. Or if not fully commit. Then I can get on/off Twitter, and say, as I periodically and freely choose to. As long as it's not directly hurtful to anyone or any particular group.
The only comment I 100% agree with. We are in the middle of WW3 already.. it’s on the internet.
This quote right here โฌ๏ธโฌ๏ธโฌ๏ธ
Plus schools.
Yes and because you disagree with the people not in power you’d prefer them censored. We get it.
you continue to lie to hide your crime. of murder. continue on.
The internet still has plenty of places that aren’t for the world or everyone… I think you need to rethink this statement.
I know.
I respectfully disagree. Social media is just noise downstream from where ideas are germinated. The real battlefield for the culture wars has been, and always will be, our educational institutions, universities and colleges specifically. Follow @CBradleyThomps1
If there is no free speech in education, there is no free speech online, and you cannot solve this issue using technology. Technology can only amplify good or bad ideas.
Strange thought (not sure if it’s a good one or not)…but better the battle is here in digital space than on real world fronts. Lightning in a bottle kind of idea…
Exactly why it should be free.
To give people a fighting chance in the cultural wars, rather than the cultural genocide that the left wants by censoring everything it deems "fake news" or racist, etc
Brainwashing the public, becoming the thought police
*and ideology, institutions, and real politik
WRONG. The entire world is not on the internet and it's FAR from it. Most people live most of their life outside of the internet and when they do use internet it's just for porn. When vocal minorities start outraging it forces change on the majority of people. That isn't freedom.
I think what we most need now is a (universally) shared set of principles and laws and a (universal) public organization to enforce them. The internet is public vital space in very few hands and this is very, very dangerous imho
Being online nowadays mostly means you're a money cow and there are a gazillion ways to milk you. But in all honesty it just shows us what is already happening in society, no matter what "side" you are on.
Twitter is run by humans, who also are not above behaving in the interest of “their side” of the culture wars. ๐คท๐ปโ๏ธ
Where you’re starting to go wrong
There is no principle, other than some guy in power banning stuff, because he doesn't like it, for some reason.
That's not a changed world, that's the same world.
So much more enlightened. Great piece.
Lol the world hasn’t changed, your just now the “conservatives”. “Everyone is a revolutionary until just after the revolution”
Could you please talk morein depth about this? Im very interested in your point of view. Could you elaborate or go deeper into this?
Wrong. Crypto, web3, encryption offer truly unique opportunities to give us direct democracy and freedom of speech. That is why they are so afraid. Who will win? Hold the line people.
And another utterly stupid take
You're completely wrong. Free speech is not complicated and it is more important than ever. As Elon put it you can say what you want as long as you obey the law. If you make false claims against someone you can still be held liable. That's all that is necessary.
Nothing has changed dude. You just most your balls and spirit
They don't need everyone and there are always new users.
I agreed with you up until you said they don’t care about politics:
Alphabet: 80% of the $ went to Democrats in 2020
Microsoft: 86%
Amazon: 86%
FB: 80%
Apple: 80%
Read Robert Epstein’s research. He constantly proves tech can steer opinions through invisible manipulation.
It is though. The only people pissing themselves over this joke are leftists. The leftists have become the censorious boomers they once hated.
twitter.com/YungCrippComed…
Why is social rebellion against religious conservatives inherently moral in a way a social rebellion against progressives is not?
You are either for free speech or you are for tyranny.
It was never about that. It was about being responsible for one’s speech. A lesson the yippies then yuppies never learned. Made worse when they built there empires “virtually” and could tell others “they didn’t understand”. Sigh.
Not that the boomer Nixon, Christian kids did anything other.. sigh. Born again or bust.
This tweet isn't totally true. There was definitely a "look people can use this to speak out against their government in authoritarian states" element to all these platforms.
I feel you're disregarding or forgetting that intentionally.
That kinda sounds like " free speech is only good when it defends what I want to talk about. If it defends someone I dislike then I don't like it any more "
Lol wot
If your politics were even slightly conservative I’d humor this argument but this is a classic case of double standard.
Reddit had subreddits dedicated to young girls in bikinis and “jailbait”. Reddit justified that by claiming “free speech”. So if you ran Reddit, I don’t think you should be talking about free speech in the internet.
wrong. why did you do it? ๐คฎ he trusted you. he. freaking. trusted. you. everyone on the inside knows, he died for free speech. because he wanted university material shared. in a public library.
why did you do it? eh tu? wow. ๐คฎ you make me fing sick.
that wasnt conservative that was all of washington
Al gore and his went after music Conservative went after porn
hell thy all went after ice tea
I’m about to have my 12th cake day. The Reddit I found and fell in love with simply could not exist today. Hell, I learned about btc on the SR sub. The discussions that took place their would not happen today. But that Reddit is why today’s Reddit exists. Anyway……poor Colby.
it is that too still - free speech doesn't take sides
"free speech is only when I like what they are saying"
I see, so previously it was conservatives trying to censor pornography, so it was bad.
Now it's liberals trying to censor politically inconvenient information and statistics that disconfirm narratives surrounding racial politics, so it's good.
It wasn't what free speech was "about" then either, even though that was the frontier for the first internet teen generation. The world didn't change, it's default media did. Baby problems VS real ones.
Free speech didn't change. You did. Your principles were challenged and it turned out you don't have principles.
'Free speech' today is only speech marxists like.
RIP Aaron Swartz .
Hey wanted only good for this world and he got destroyed and framed for doing so.
This isn't a just world,
This is a world made for those in power to try to keep as much of it.
Looool smh I feel you
I just deleted my Reddit account yesterday.
I posted “as Conservatives, we should reject this crap” on a pic of a gun-toting girl posing in front of a car with her boobs hanging out.
I was flagged for hate speech.
Twitter is next.
Reddit a cesspool
Freedom is always your cause, hypocrite of yours. Never understood how ur underaged ppl like your child see internet content, do you expect ur child to judge the good and bad content by themselves, who don't understand how to distinguish them?
Have a moral indecency please!
Parents should monitor their kids internet usage. Period.
Reddit does suck tho
These words landed hard. Well phrased ๐
huh... ๐ค how bout dat. so... You do know Aaron Swartz then... ... ... hows this trip to your hanging tree feeling... "Yishan"? is it... ๐ค hmmm. we didn't catch your name... eh tu? ๐ฉธ youtu.be/RUQl6YcMalg
You did a garbage job.
- low T
Dude, I respectfully disagree with this long thread. can we come up with a way to quantify the censorship of left and right? there's no comparison. with an extremely diverse FB list, I assure you there is NO comparison.
Man you’re way cooler now that you don’t run Reddit
You were an engineer who was way out his depth being put in a position which required understanding people.
Your naivety about the actual motivations of far more savvy corporate operators would be touching, if you weren’t trying to present it as some kind of gospel truth.
some of what u say makes sense, but gen-x’s have huge experience with banning and being banned, and not for speech, but for anything! The issue was that you could always come back, new ip, email, etc. problem today is the self absorbed need for people to be identified.
and thus, you are banning their identity, and forever. Add scale to this, and therein lies the problem. Getting banned from servers, forums, etc used to be less dramatic, more common and easily overcome if you wanted to. Forcing a person to be real changed this.
I also suspect that your theory that the topic is not whats banned is incorrect. Easily testable. I also believe that YT for example specifically communicates banned topics or what point of view you must express when talking about it.
This genxer remembers
eff.org/cyberspace-ind…
This, this is what the internet should have been, not this shit we get now
A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
by John Perry Barlow Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us
eff.org
"older" HA!
This is true, and also true for those of us who did the earlier work of developing the x.25 email protocol, over bitnet, jnet and etc, clocking an email speed from the Cali to Stockholm at 29 seconds.
We are taking about suppressing important informations that might affect election results and human choices and Reddit is guilty of that as well. You are building assumptions based on your own convictions. I see the same hate from the left. You aren’t protecting anyone.
They are protecting the Leftist hive mind, porn, pedophilia, election fraud., and all.
As a Boomer, I think it still does, problems and all.
I thought that was an interesting piece, cheers
Can twitter / reddit avoid the drama by allowing people to curate their own feeds (0=mute -> 9=show_all), and subscribe to third-party blocking / curatorial services? Hate the Vavylon Vee or Vrooklyn Vlad? Report it to your favorite curatorial service & let them block it.
Great thread on explaining your position as your opinion holds weight considering your experience but I wholeheartedly disagree with your conclusion
The gen xrs who didn’t realize Alex p Keaton was a parody. A satire. Not a road map. Sigh. Easily manipulated by shiny bobbles , caviar dreams and currupt older men.)
Doesn’t Elon’s suggestion of open source algo, visible moderation actions, and freedom from advertising motives address all your issues and would prove all your points in reality if they are true?
I fought hard for free speech back in the day, we didn't ban/censor people unless they did something illegal with a victim...and now just because the bulk of the unwashed masses gave us the internet bum rush we need to change? Screw that, our house our rules.
Exactly!
Yes! That is still possible. Public liars ought to be fined (just like speeding tickets) for reckless endangerment of gullible, uninformed minds. E.g. Fox Lies and similar outlets; Putin should be fined $Billions for lying to Russian people, in addition, tried for war crimes.
I think as a world we need to sit down and deal with discrimination. Be it based on race, sex, religion, etc. I feel most issues are just one group not wanting to support another because of (insert bias).
Can pmarca just unblock me. I’m a peasant.
You must not be talking about the “fact checkers”. Show me one “screenshot” that is for the right and against the left.
Very good thread and I did listen and understand and a lot of it makes sense but not all is true.
And there other ways around it other than censorship.
Man this is so on point ๐ฏ
This is where you messed up.. maybe past 3 comments. You judge a 150 IQ person with regular twitter usage and understanding of AI as a regular genX . Sad..
Yes, exactly. GenXer like me agrees!
it was indeed a flowering of the human spirit and would have remained so without their imposition of top down control. these folks are so scared of organic evolution and non-hierarchical human connections. hoping @elonmusk can help us resurrect it.
Remember, the Internet was begat by Arpanet, which connected the US military with US universities. Both institutions with a strong discipline culture.
In particular, universities (then) embraced freedom of speech with responsibility plus peer reviews, no plagiarism and the like.
We’ve always had some form of censorship. From compuserve and bulletin boards to NNTP Usenet content moderation. Unfettered free speech means misinformation, bots, trolling and digital blight. Any sustainable social network thrives on succeeds in community and prod ops
The late John McAfee belong to this group
I'm not convinced, while this is true for some (@timberners_lee @jimmy_wales) for others the 'internet' was a commercial opportunity, and those people seem more interested in control than social good, otherwise we'd see more b-corps and less billionaires
Forgot about this and now this thread just made me want to take a step back and try to recall how the 90s and early 2000s banning of things went down. They tried to ban Pokémon for goodness sake.
Flawless victory btw
Yeah, the multiple fatality bug (see multiple heads on screen) for Jonny Cage was pretty irritating -- definitely banworthy in competitions. Total time waste! (kidding, I get ya)
Note that much of the vitriol directed at Mortal Kombat was driven by Nintendo lobbying against console competitor SEGA with their more «mature» games.
๐คฃ๐คฃ๐คฃ
Dawg ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ.. I'm still shocked this shit scared me
Fam you used to freak out everytime we put MK on. To point that mom banned us from playing the game ๐คฃ๐คฃ.
Then we found you sneak playing it on your own ๐คฃ๐คฃ
This feels so quaint now.
finish him!
Johny Cage wiiiiiiins ๐๐ช๐
Hahah both a great point and a incredible throw back to the good ol days !!
Haha 'finish him!!!!!'
I was not allowed to play this game. BUT like many kids in the 90s, my friend was and play we did ๐คช
Give a mouse a cookie. We should have + stopped there - because now we have GTA and a myriad of video game cultures where you can rape, murder, steal, pillage, and live in alternate reality where all hell breaking loose is encouraged. I don’t jinn you want to be pro on this arg
I remember.
Remember it was Al Gore’s wife who led the charge against those videos games in the early 90s
Gangster rap, Violent Games late 80’s and 90’s conservatives were trying to ban everything.
I laughed so hard at this idea back in the 90’s
You mean Tipper Gore?
I appreciate the switch, but the authoritarian religious right has long ago been replaced by the authoritarian wokeligious left.
These free speech guys haven't really changed, it's more that the repressors of free speech have now different stripes.
Carmageddon, Demonic Tutor, Killer Instinct, Mortal Kombat
You haven’t ban the awful tweet of Kate griffin the comedian who post a bloody head beheaded of Trump or the tweet of Francisco Ameliach chavist governor ordering to kill civilians!
Yes that was dumb. So is banning people saying dumb things now.
LIES *Sparta*
*this is getting good, you brought your own rope... lulz* karma goddess love it. youtu.be/oVg6_Z-ureE
Everyone in the comments below pretending like Tipper Gore's views negate or nullify the very large contingent of social conservatives who wanted to ban porn/video game content/etc. are just delusional.
I like how everyone blames the Christian conservatives but conveniently forgets that it was Hilary Clinton, Joe Lieberman, and Tipper Gore that led the charge.
lmfao theyre all conservatives
Hillary Clinton and Tipper Gore are as conservative as a moon made of pink cheese.
Oh man, this reminded me of how some folks were upset by the handful of pixels that made up a "panty shot" in the original Double Dragon coin-op machine opening
Oh yes, and the rap music.
And society has truly benefitted... Maybe modern 'enlightened' non-religious liberals (neo-pagans?) should advocate for porn & violence to be included in school curriculum?
Tipper Gore was the face of the Parental Advisory Committee. It was hardly just the Religious Right who wanted to censor in the 1990s
There was also huge concern about authoritarian governments. E.g. one of the protagonists of Stephenson's Cryptonomicon is building a private data haven to preserve holocaust materials beyond the reach of states.
Not that much has changed.
The threat to internet freedom still comes from religious conservatives, it's just their religion is wokeness and they call themselves "progressives."
Big difference between lobbying for censorship based on personal views of morality & lobbying for regulation to ensure we don’t replicate atrocities of the past by allowing unchecked misinformation & lies to be spread via the media like the holocaust & genocide in Rwanda.
Free speech arose in ancient Greece. From a strictly American perspective, it was codified with the rest of the First Amendment in 1791, but it predated that by almost two centuries, the concept having arrived with the first British settlers, for whom it was settled in common law
Porn is not imagined degeneracy. i
It is degeneracy. I'm not in favor of making it illegal, but it is what it is.
"this free speech idea arose out of a culture of late-90s"
Imagine thinking the idea of free speech arose in the late 90's.
Its amazing how little you sheltered tech nerdspergs know about history, culture, philosophy, religion, and the rest of the world outside Silicon Valley.
This is simply false. The rest of the screed is invalid.
Well. Tipper Gore also tried to silence hip hop artists. Republicans were against her and stuck up for free speech. So… you’re wrong about this point.
Genuinely curious… if porn isn’t moral degeneracy then what would you consider as moral degeneracy?
I guess you don't know who Al Gore is?
He was no religious conservative fyi
Imagined??
Oh yeah, they wanted to sensor pornography. That’s right! Pornography is not speech.
Censorship to protect their psychotic lies. Many right-wing Christian conservatives misquoted the Bible or quoted out of context to support their psychosis and to control anyone that didn't share their Biblical delusions.
Hillary Clinton was one of the most adamant " game censors" there was. You are pointing to what was a heavily slanted narrative from the likes of " the daily show"
The “free speech idea” arose centuries ago in, for example, Athenian democracy, The English Bill of Rights 1689, the Déclaration des droits de l'homme et du citoyen de 1789, the First Amendment etc.
Nah. We wanted free speech but not harassment!
Do you really believe that " censors" are not leftist?
Imagined moral degeneracy?! ๐คฆโ๏ธ
What a bunch of bull crap.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Evelyn Beatrice Hall, 1906.
Religious people trying to ban porn on the internet 30 years ago is why Musk is trying to buy twitter... I'm sorry, I'm getting off here.
Late 90’s? No, since the 1960’s and it has not wavered since. More people are awake now, since they have seen more and more corrupt governments & just how sick & disgusting and against humanity they are.
I guess you’re too young to really know reality. The 60’s sends their love.
Your take on John Locke’s stance?:
“Most men use power for their own advancement and those who are intolerant of others should in turn not be tolerated – such groups are not to be trusted with any path that may lead them to power and the overthrow of the liberties of others”
Wasn't it Tipper Gore - wife of Al Gore - that drove much of the 80's and 90's censorship movement?
Pretty big overstatement, as the Moral Majority types were ahead of that by at least a decade. Also not a complete contradiction, really, as the right end of the Democratic party are and have been conservatives. The party encompassed/s a wide range of political orientations.
Now the biggest threat to free speech is the narrative that we can silence those with an opinion different to our own as we are scared of healthy debate
Yes - now that conservatives are no longer against it it’s a bad idea.
Also I’m pretty sure you’re right about “the free speech idea” arising out of the ‘90s. Except to be more specific it was the 1690s with a little thing called “the Enlightenment”.
porn is moral degeneracy. duh. discredited on 3 out of who knows how many...if they had succeeded in banning porn the world would be a much better place. men would be men, not little jackoffs behind a screen. women less objectified etc. your internet utopia is cesspool
It’s a proven fact that porn brain = lizard brain.
Yo did you say the idea of@free speech began In the 90’s? Holy shit man.
Imagined moral degeneracy? Stupidest thing I’ve read today. If you watch porn regularly you have an addiction problem and your real personal life sucks. Ridiculous
Below this tweet are two main types of replies-
1. Social conservatives defending censorship of content on religious grounds
2. Goofballs who couldn't comprehend your description of free speech culture and the early internet.
Huh. Free speech to me still means Mario Savio, Berkeley, 1960s. Guess things have changed.
Free speech arose in the nineties??? Lemme guess, you were born in the eighties!?! ๐
What an utterly stupid take
1776 was in the 1990s? There's a special name for that level of smarts
I think you will find that the free speech idea goes back a little further than the late 90s!
That "free speech" idea rose out of the napster/steal-music/entitled crowd.
Porn is not speech. If porn is speech, then drugs are speech too. Speech is made of words.
The same Good People who are censoring sex eduation in schools
Oh no!
People don't want free speech, they want to hear more speech they agree with.
There is an even older internet, Usenet, which was basically 100% free speech, and worked quite well until "the September that never ended" in 1993. I don't know to what extent Elon was involved in that.
“Yes, the execs are (whatever demographic) and the employees are (whatever politics) but they don't care about it. They don't.”
Yes twitter suppressed Hunter Biden’s story bc they didn’t really want squabbles
If you’re dumb to believe that you’re dumb to believe anything.
Also pre-Web vis-a-vis FTP, email thru pre-2005; free speech yes, and that culture was also about freely exchanging knowledge and ideas, NOT freely propagating lies, Orwellian lies, and disinformation.
Need to eliminate public liars. Return to integrity, honesty, facts & ideas.
How come I had to delete a comment about 1812 and the white house or i was banned ? seem like free speech on your terms to me !
He, an individual, cannot take over a publicly listed company without regulatory approval as well as that of major shareholders. He would have to file with SEC and include a continuity plan.
You are referring to Gen X, which were in their late-teens and 20s at that time. We have the strongest sense of free speech imo because of the culture we grew up in that had ZERO limits. Elon is Gen X. Gen X Rules. Gen X for the win. ๐ค๐ค
It’s like I always say, the internet was cool until the squares took over.
I see you didnt frequent many places where people would communicate back then.
I liked that Era. The internet was actually informative. Now it is so much small bits of information. It's like throw a bunch of stuff at the wall and see what sticks. Interspersed with market blitzing.
Wrong, late 90’s had a good amount of “discussion boards” and they were heavily moderated, absolutely no free speech unless you became a moderator and the owner let you have free will. Even IRC chats had moderators.
Aaron Swartz, right now... For REALZ. say his name... say his fing name. I will make you beg to say his name by the time I get done with you.
I love it how you are trying to paint free speech as some obscure Gen X idea that was cool in the 1990s when actually it was way cooler in the 1790s when a group of outliers wrote it into the US constitution
The early internet created a place where they could share and build.
People like you came in and took that.
Predates that with the EFF, but there was a general feeling that informative should be easily accessible in academia, it’s what drove TBL.
I also think that you are missing the point that provoking argument/division increases traffic, and as an indirect consequence is more likely to generate Ad revenue. Commercialised social media spaces thrive from disagreement.
But that polarisation also amplifies into society
It was a bit delusional to think there ever was free speech before the internet. It’s not something to save, it is something we are all working towards. Humans may be a bit too emotional to handle it though. Too many people still believe in the validity of violence.
He's also a huckster who has a need for positive attention. His accomplishments are not as impossible as they seem, and his list of vaporware is long. If he buys Twitter, it will eat him alive, and I will enjoy it with popcorn.
Running Twitter is probably one of the hardest jobs right now. Might look simpler from the outside, much more complex from inside, and vastly diff from building EVs and spaceships.
He does have an idea, because that is precisely what people told him when he decided to start a rocket company and a car company. What he hasn't demonstrated is the skills necessary to do diplomatic people work. First principles thinking won't get him through.
His addiction to attention is probably a serious liability in that position. It's not suited for a hermit, but his need to be larger-than-life is something the job will be very unhealthy for.
LOL...twitter is the most disappointing property on the internet
*demon tries to inhabit my body*
Demon: OUCH
Me: yeah...
Demon: WHAT THE HELL
Me: I know
Demon: EVERYTHING HURTS, WHY?? AND WHATS WRONG WITH THIS SHOULDER???
Me: idk man, can I offer you a mint?
Let’s also not make left and right wing “ equal” right now given that the representative right wing body of the GOP is a Trump authoritarian movement hell bent on white supremacy and theft. Disinformation given this movement is far more prevalent coming from right wing.
“Both sides” isn’t serious analysis
Automotive and social media platform markets are different. His playbook will be ...
I think he does know, that’s what is amazing to me. He seems to grasp the macro in a way most just can’t.
Man you wrote A LOT
You're absolutely right! The same was true when he decided to enter the space and automobile industry. Still he managed to overcome the harsh reality of these industries of long-established players.
Who, if not Elon? He has the talent for such hard endeavors.
i didn't read your little thread because web3 solves this
There was a time when it was d Left that argued 4 free speech fiercely, in an absolutist sense, indvidl liberty, etc but it's now that very Left that has bcum so radical as 2 put up d 'cancel' (culture) flag @ every turn. 2 this crowd, even @jk_rowling is RW. Time Musk takes over
More pain than starting a rocket company from scratch? @elonmusk
“He has no idea”. Lol ok.
It's Twitter get a grip on yourself.
"He has no idea"
That's all I need to know.
End of reading of your long thread.
The biggest challenge for liberalism today is the use of its own key features against it: Free speech enabling the spread of authoritarian propaganda, democracy empowering illiberal leaders, and markets producing an unresponsive oligarchic class.
" he has no idea" but you do lol
The man started a rocket company with his own money knowing he’s going to lose it all… world of pain is subjective.
Says. Yishan
You're echo chamber is on the fritz.
How can he take over Twitter when it is a government enterprise?
Never bet against Elon…
if its not against the law you let it be said. Really, its a very very simple thing actually.
I think you can create a system, that manages itself. Just have to find the right objective
wrong. you know what I have the hardest time swallowing... and no sweetie it isn't the drizzle from your tiny petter. I love this man. I am the Goddess Isis incarnate... all that stands between you burning gloriously before my eyes. and him... is his wish to be kind. u DIG?!
Can’t we just rouse the BTS fans to keep him in check?
You just said the biggest joke of the week. Barnum and Bailey need back their market share
Soy-E-O of reddit everybody...
“He has no idea”? This is Elon Musk FFS.
you shouldve started this off with some more context like maybe a brief history on the origins of the internet
Pain or not, he still gonna have more clout and money than you.
he runs a trillion dollar ev company, multi billion dollar space company and a neuro company which is also valued over a billion dollar and he wouldn’t know what he is getting into with twitter.. BUT you know better? Lol thanks have a great day!
Elon's abilities with technology are unquestioned. Does that mean he can solve the sort of sociological problems discussed here? I don't think his past experience has any relevance on how he'll fair at the helm of twitter. Which is probably why he wants to take on the challenge.
I am sure he is but question is not about me here lol
Sounds like a threat
He has fought through many things that would other people quit or even jump of a buildings roof. He knows pain really good.
And it's not only the awesome engineering he is able to accomplish and fight through.
World of pain, he’s a quarter of the way to a trillion bucks. I’m sure he’ll sleep well at night.
He's not stupid.
Twitter works fairly well as it is and it would be daft to wade in and take over just because he can, he would likely just kill the platform.
Hi Yishan, this is a really interesting thread, thank you for sharing. I know we don't say that enough - but sometimes a โค๏ธ isn't enough. Thank you.
No it isn’t.
Is that strictly true?
Or, like Gold in "Good as Gold", you have been asked only twice??
๐๐คฃ๐
great thread. followed.
Reading your tweets is illuminating every single time.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts with us!
Did you date my mom
lmao elon op
You argue that the GenXers are out of touch with the Internet…
Instead, have you considered that you are out of touch with how these social medial companies are currently run? Reddit in 2012 is a very different time than Twitter in 2022. I’ve seen it first hand.
I was recently kicked off Facebook (aka account disabled) for a post I shared in April 2020 of this political cartoon that appeared in TIME by @edelstudio. Was this discovered by a platform scowering AI/algo bot and reviewed by a right wing or left wing human who deemed it...
Self harm/suicide promoting? I have nonrecourse to salvage 15 years of photo albums except small claims court in San Mateo County accordong to @MetaAI TOS. @Meta @MetaNewsroom
Damages limited to $100 or fees I have paid to FB over last 12 mos. in lengthy FB TOS disclaimer stating no information or data or repsonsibilty...it does not mention photos. I just want my irreplaceable photos of my children. I think a judge will rule in my favor. Agree?
PS...Twitter editing function bot please change scowering to scouring.
Hi Chris, sorry to hear about that. Many people who shared the image have had the same problem. My Instagram account with 35,000 followers was deleted by Meta over the same image. I’ve tried to appeal the issue but getting no answers from Meta.
Reporters should pick up this story. @karaswisher
FB employee number 8 has told me they are "committing corporate suicide" by this policy and process. @moskov
(No comment)
Saying Elon has “no idea” and that you “KNOW” he doesn’t understand Internet culture because he was “late to Bitcoin” and “busy fucking actresses/singers” is such a intellectually weak line of thinking.
You: “Elon, you have no idea. You don’t understand culture. It’s going to damage your psyche. No one can do this better than Jack. Trust me, I was in Reddit in 2012. Go back to building real things and having sex with actresses, and leave this to the experts.”
So condescending.
Finally, you seem to have a lack of understanding that, broadly speaking, the left is upset when people are NOT censored, and the right is upset when people ARE censored.
You try to argue that both sides are being censored, and that's why they get angry. That's not the case.
If the right was concerned with censorship and civil liberties they wouldn’t be constantly supporting bans of books, medical procedures etc. No private organization technological or not is required to host you and can terminate access for violation of TOS.
It's called narration. You do that when you write something. Sometimes, it doesn't mean something literally.
Also, "literally" isn't to put emphasis, but to explain that you're meaning the exact words you say without subtext. Just in case.
Many of us heard of BTC around 2015, or even earlier. But it’s a strange concept and difficult to understand with a base that discusses things like a fanatical religion. Not everyone will jump in immediately even after reading into it. I think he has points, but is missing too.
oh look some recreational misinformation right here, dude said none of that
oh you're right I guess he did
so be polite
NFT profile pic ๐๐๐๐๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ
Reddit 2022 is more popular, more financially solvent than Reddit 2014. If the censorship there was bad for business, and bad for posters like myself, we would stop using the platform and go to a competitor(and yes there are competitors to reddit.)
Also the irony of you, and all the complainers about Twitter's TOS enforcement, complaining on Twitter itself isn't lost on me or the rest of the internet Left.
That’s the whole point… Once network effects have been established, is virtually impossible for a competing platform to achieve scale. As a result, people won’t leave Twitter.
That’s why it’s so crucial that Twitter doesn’t censor voices and ideas.
Nothing different than ISCABBS back in the early '90s. Only scale.
Amazing thread, thanks, ton of insights that clearly come out of pain of having Actually Done It
Save thread
This Thread is Saved to your Notion Workspace.
BTW, you can add tags to the saved tweets and threads by typing them in the mention as hashtags, e.g: #notion #marketing #self_development ...
Mind expanded
Incredible thread
Maybe "fixing Twitter" is like invading Russia in winter
Fair point, was thinking more for Elon
Like you said, he has other much more critical priorities but for some reason he's wading into this fight
Could be the Napoleonic quest that leads to his downfall
Looks u haven't seen @elonmusk TED interview y'day. Says he is IN knowing well the massive pain you're talking abt.
What's ur bone with:
1) Making Twitter algo #opensource
2) Making adjudications accountable, transparent ie., fair & open. #Wikipedia like approach to #Twitter
Do you think jack could be successful as ceo should Elon get it and take it public (or jack had constraints such as not cratering Mau/dau metrics by getting rid of bots) because it was public? Elon + jack = twitter2.0?
your analogy with being late to Bitcoin could be applied to Jack being out of touch with current internet culture since he's so out of touch with the developments of web3 being built around Ethereum (and actively hostile to them)
Good job at explaining your view on the subject. I truly agree. It's about limiting harm and not censoring. You see it truly in places like India which has historical divisions.
Powerful (right or wrong) ideas can generate violent outbursts with dire consequences.
Any communication platform has to ensure that the speed of propagation of an idea is slower than speed of its true debate.
This surely was possible before internet.
But that is gone with internet. So any idea can spread before it is debated. There's the danger. @elonmusk
TY for your 2 excellent threads!
Outside of those explainers, what about all the intentional disinformation? Amplification, algorithms, bots, astroturf...leaving aside free speech, how to fix??
One of the best threads I've ever read. Above all, loved your insight about the dysfunctionalies of our tech titans. We should stop dehumanizing them. Also, great analysis on how our own extreme views and absolutist posturing are the problem, not the platforms.
The thing is, even if I would agree that the chance of opening a pandora's box trying to fix it would be great, If I were Elon I'd still try ๐ btw, ppl should talk a lot more about Jack's "redemption". I hated him when I read about his first ternure, but he grew on me.
Oh. I forgot. Write a fucking book. Please.
Good irrelevant thread. Twitter will be fine whatsoever.
It could be the most expensive item bought by a human - no it's not a planet or island or gold mine it's an online forum with issues
Damn this was good.
save thread
This! ๐๐ฟ
Fantastic thread and well articulated. Philosophically the crux is uploading every part of us (good and bad) onto context-less, low-resolution online networks. Not sure any policy or product upgrade can fix that, only human behavior and nature can.
Having said that...just like the "real" world, upholding universal principles and values is noble and worth pursuing...it just so happens that the internet as it currently exists may not allow that to happen effectively.
Still I would venture to say that it's no different than what's happened through human history aka preservation and proliferation of ideas and values across territories, cultures, generations, etc. Just added a massive new playing field.
If we stopped allowing artificial methods of promoting emotionally charged ad campaigns or “reporting” from “official” media outlets I think that would fix a lot of this. Don’t block or shadow ban just don’t promote it.
Right is upset they are getting silenced. Left is upset not more of right is silenced. I can’t relate to your “both sides are the same”. How do you know that you grasp “culture” better than eg Elon? That you are not in the type of bubble you claim others are?
All the Twitter check marks coming out of the wood work to state their opinions- pls stop polluting my effing timeline. This is THE ONE THING I wish Twitter would fix - just because I’m interested in technology doesn’t mean I’m interested to know what some rando feels about Musk!
Very insightful and I agree with MOST of your points, however, political contribution stats may refute your thoughts that political bias is not a factor in the tech decision making.
He did address that in the thread - granted it was with a “they don’t care”
Incredible thread, thanks for sharing the insights.
this is such a wrong take
Very convincing and well articulated counter argument. You should run for some sort of public office.
Really owned him there dude.
๐คฃ
Very convincing, well articulated and credible profile. You should run for some sort of public office.
Ad hominem because you have nothing else as counter-argument?
Wow Sid you’ve given us a lot to consider there thank you
Crowd - please don’t censor me
I’m writing a white paper to back my opinionated tweet
Stay here - twitter.com/wyldeaf/status…
You seem like a great guy. But I’m afraid you really underestimated social media employees during Trumps presidency. They went totally political and bonkers. Im fiercely independent politically and made millions on social media doing political stuff. They censored the right.
Hear Hear !
save thread
Shockingly smart. That you could lay this out on this weird platform is astonishing to me. My congratulations. Prediction: Elon is smart enough to know you’re right and will not acquire.
It’s not that complicated. *Within the confines of the law,* all speech should be allowed. Period. No one is forced to listen, you can still block & mute on Twitter, but Elon wants transparency via open source algorithm. Anyone opposed to transparency likely has nefarious intent.
Very true, we do have the block option. Thanks for the reminder. Enjoy your stay.
You lost me at he would have been in bitcoin way earlier. Most people still aren’t in bitcoin, so therefore that is not a good tie to internet culture, but simply a small subset
Get a substack bro
Great, smart ๐งต Yishan
๐ฏ๐ฏ
Such a powerful, balanced and poignant thread.
Really resonate with how you've framed it and agree with most of what you've said.
All this assumes that Elon wants to act as some neutral arbiter, or some pro-freedom philosopher-king, rather than just generate more pro-Elon spam/propaganda as well as policy results that steer money to him and his business.
He wants money and he wants the adulation of his simps. He currently has both, he likes it, and he wants more of it. People are over-complicating things here.
I think you know Twitter has gone too far with censoring when you see Babylon bee getting suspended cuz they said rachel levine won man of the year lol
Nope. That was straight up hate.
Your assumptions suggest you’re ok with targeted racial/sexist/homophobic attacks if you also happen to dislike the attacked group, correct? I see that joke (that they make over and over) and see a sad attempt to hurt people who are already getting punched by everyone.
It's the truth. It's not an attack. That's subjective clown world nonsense.
that what I was looking for. What you're saying is you and I may believe that trans women are still men, so its important that our right to make fun of them be protected because we don't think its an important right to protect. So now we decide which rights are cool to protect eh
I'll also suggest something else- if you get off on attacking a group of people already being attacked by every single other person, that says something about you. Maybe you think gays and trans people and maybe women deserve another fist to the face? You like going after them?
Absolutely not. They do not deserve a fist to the face.
Omg you need therapy relax Babylon bee is satire geez
Crazy woke liberals at Twitter need to calm down
It isn’t making fun of them to say that. They are free to live how they want. Just don’t groom small children and censor people for telling the truth.
Yup, that’s what free speech entails.
dafuq are you talking about
Levine is literally in one of the highest positions of power. Bee didn't go against some confused teen... or whatever the victim you try to make everyone to be.
It’s a JOKE.
Surely you see that it’s not a lighthearted joke. It’s meant to hurt the most broken, weakest kid on the playground. Punch up, not down. These kids are targets of violence constantly and Babylon bee is like “yeah, drag those bastards!”. It violated TOS…it’s like racist jokes.
What happened to us that we stopped believing private companies should have enforceable terms of service? And what happened that we became cancel culture overnight? Cancelling trans kids, cancelling Twitter, cancelling books we don’t like…Jesus
Seriously, you think that 4 star trans general is the weakest person on the block?
What’s discriminating now? What should that person be protected at all?
Straight white maes are not the weakest kids on the playground.
The average Twitter user is not capable of punching down at Levine, a federal official. This shows the fallacy of progressive thinking on power. The way you talk about things matters and nobody should be abusive. But sex is too important a category to be off the table either.
Are you the joke police?
They are allowed by law to make that joke. End of discussion.
If you dress like a clown, act like a clown and get treated like a clown can you then blame others for the way they treat you?
Just so we’re super clear - you think banking the Bee and demonetizing them and all the other stuff is fine because you don’t like their politics. Right?
You all are literally doing the thing Yishan's talking about. Hush.
Yes free speech is about racial and sexist and homophobic verbal attacks unless they rise to the level of a crime.
only problem with your tweet is that, not every country recognized 100 gender and millions pronouns. when you say homophobic which country law you are taking about. If i use he it is absolutely legal in my country. so why censorship.
Homophobia is homophobia. It’s not about legality.
Who gets to choose what’s right and wrong? I don’t trust twitter currently, they work for the government in that regard, it’s wrong.
Your view implies that there’s a supreme decider of what’s okay write, there is not.
Well, the company. The business.
It's not in their business interest to have a group of people feel harassed, and receive bigoted attacks to the point they dont want to use the site.
Musk and his disciples I'm sure disagree, and feel like this is a good thing.
weak excuses for privileged political CENSORSHIP. Twitter works hand in hand with dem/lib/pharma. It’s been taken over by the gov. to push one set of ideas over the other.
If we do not stop media from being free from gov. takeover, we will be in a state of communism.
If it's protected by the first amendment then it should be allowed on Twitter. Fuck censorship.
The whole point of free speech is to support speech you don't like. Anybody can support speech they like.
The whole point of free speech is that the government may not abridge it. Nobody needs to support speech they don’t like nor should they. That’s such a strange perversion of the right.
No man, supporting your right to say anything even if its hateful towards me or just a straight up lie. That is free speech but there is nothing to sag there won’t be consequences
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
I know the Voltaire quote. There is a difference between supporting speech and supporting the right to free speech. Perhaps I simply misread the initial post.
If you believe a man can identify and transition to being a woman, can someone who was born Asian identify as being Black? Sex is more biological than the social construct of race. So would you support someone who wanted to transition to a different race?
Do you truly believe those things are comparable?
Explain to me why they are different? Most people are made up of different races and ethnicities (black, Asian, white, Hispanic) so they are normally a mix but every single person alive was born from a woman that required sperm from a man. Sex seems more defined than race.
There are almost examples of people identifying as a different race or having transitioned to a different one.
It appears as if you have just done so yourself
My argument is that both are biological but that race is more a social construct, therefore it makes more sense to transition between races than gender. So if society accepts the latter, why not former. If you cant, or won’t explain, then fine.
Both draw from biology to make these social claims, sure. Gender wayyy predates “race” as a concept of identity. Ditto gender fluidity or what have you. Anyway, I choose “won’t” cause today I don’t hate myself
Thanks. The points you make strengthen the case for allowing people to transition races if society accepts transiting genders.
Wait…who PUNCHED Rachel Levine?
“punching” is a figure of speech, as in “punching up/down”. Obviously it is not about actual punching.
Then who gives a fuck, its words
Why wouldn’t I care about words? Words are important.
I think one important thing EVERYBODY is failing to realize is that they are actually doing everything they can to cater to a group of people that make up 1% of the population AT THE EXPENSE OF ANOTHER GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE JUST AS VICTIMIZED THAT MAKE UP 51% OF THE POPULATION
GO AHEAD TELL ME IM WRONG AND I WILL KNOW THEN THAT YOU ARE SEXIST AND YOU SUPPORT THE CONTINUING VICTIMIZATION OF WOMEN!!!!
> you’re okay with offensive jokes?
We grew up with thick skins. Some folks now don't even have a skin. They also lack spines. Their thinking is shallow they can't reason and hold their own. They have never won an argument through reason. Well too bad, learn to think. Emotional thinking is a losing proposition.
Always telling to me when people argue facts with their feelings. Who is more delusional? The crossdresser or the person who is too afraid to hurt someones feelings?
"Nice thread. Too bad I didn't read it. Have you considered that I have an example of banning behavior that is going too far? Bet you didn't think of that possibility."
Which is?
The majority of us (society) haven't decided where that line is.
Read the tweet to which that tweet is responding ๐
The conclusion of the thread is that inevitably sometimes lines need to be drawn, as opposed to an old-internet ideal with no lines ever.
Arguing over what lines are drawn, and the trend of how those lines are being drawn over time, is still relevant
You get an A+ for reading comprehension. You don't see that that much on social media. ๐
Do you even Twitter bro?
The only lines that should be drawn on twitter are between that which is protected by the first amendment and that which is not. Fuck all other censorship.
Rachel Levine is a a man. How is it that saying something true is going too far?
To be fair, not reading the thread and replying to the thread sort of proves the thread.
No, that's just Musk et el. unable to process that 'white straight male' =/= 'best person ever' any more.
So we're now in a backlash period where Levine and others become the target of foolish, impotent, backward public hazings.
It is only the redundant, revealing themselves.
TOS. Learn what it is and what it means, then live by it. Break it and you can Bee suspended.
Honestly, it’s not that hard. Conservatives have nine alternative social media sites, some designed specifically for and by conservatives. Sites where their viewpoints are favored. But they are desperately upset that they don’t get to do whatever they want on this site. Jeezus.
I am always a bit surprised when they are stunned to get kicked for TOS violations. Even two bit boards uphold TOS and kick for violations.
I honestly, truly believe conservatives and libertarians, especially, think they should just be able to do anything and everything they want. Their level of entitlement and perceived persecution is a +20 right now. I don’t and cannot relate to that level of entitlement at all.
Same. They are frantic to set rules, but don't think they should have to follow any.
So, because of the transphobia then?
Twitter should allow every kind of speech that is covered by the 1st amendment.
That seems fine to me
I'm a pretty well-read person, but I have no idea who rachel levine is. That you DO know who rachel is and seem to care so much indicates to me you need to back away from the rabbit hole.
Harassment is actually a real thing, and if you don’t want to be the subject of a lawsuit, you have to make some unpopular choices, like banning a major account for a “joke.” Sorry if that upsets you.
People dont need their minds bubbled wrapped. The continuing of it just makes people more emotionally sensitive. Humans dont need a select few to protect them from human thoughts. We all have the same capacity as Jack et al. to survive. We are all apart of the human experience
Yes, but we do need help preventing bad actors from using the pipes to spread things that hurt us.
See disinformation, Russian.
Who gets to decide that & how is it defined? Doing so unbaisedly and objectively is near impossible. One person's perception may not be the other's intention. The risk of limiting necessary dialog (even the scary stuff) for a healthy society can be just as consequential.
And there’s a whole sect of intelligence, psyops, that knows too well we are human, have successfully used social media to kill millions with Covid disinformation, change election outcomes, etc. it’s not free speech to them, it’s a weapon.
There's ZERO proof those things wouldn't have happened w/o it. SM didnt make covid strains more deadly & contagious
There are enough organizations w/o SM to feed people the same info.
Depends which side you're on in determining which election outcome was the wrong one. ๐ค
No, facts are facts. It doesn’t depend what ‘side you’re on’.
Bots. Troll Farm.
Good thread but I feel misses two key points:
1) Free speech is also about stopping some organisations astroturfing to sway public opinion. Some people are currently more free than others to make themselves heard and consequently they suppress the freedom of others.
2)...
...2) Humans are social animals with long evolved social mechanisms to deal with bad behaviour. If interactions online are so bad compared to IRL it's because the online environment is failing to replicate IRL environment closely enough.
Fixes for both are pretty obvious...
...so I have to wonder why they've not already been effected.
My guess is that a lot of powerful players like social media exactly as it is because it enables them to easily and cheaply:
- divide and rule
- spread fear
- sway public opinion
So while I thank you for your...
... the valuable insights in your thread I feel you are either bring naïve or disingenuous by leaving these two issues out and not commenting on the power reasons the obvious fixes have not been made already.
How is it obvi. Not to me
The more liberal states have become the less horrible they are. All times, all places.
Plus there is an obvious overall trend to greater liberalism over many years despite some states falling back into despotism.
If there were a causal link between increased tolerance and the rise of evil ideas and attitudes then we would see no trend towards greater liberalism and less violence because liberalism would always get nerfed via a negative feedback loop before it could grow.
Liberalism has plateaued as of late. Right wing resurgence thanks to growing inequality. People now still crave certitude during times of economic duress same as they always have.
wow wow wow, thanks for sharing your thoughts
This was a good read!
You are wrong from your first sentence.
He’s not succeeding in this transaction.
He really is just fucking around as charlatans usually do
“Elon has no idea”
Stop read, block OP.
You’re doing yourself a misfavour. It’s a really good thread. The hot take culture you’re displaying is the problem. You take one sentence, make a judgement, and close your mind instantly. Open your mind.
1 sentence can destroy one’s credibility.
He destroyed his.
No need to waste time reading his nonsense.
And that's why you're so single-minded
Lol ok. Most well thought out and balanced thread. But it goes against your cult beliefs so I get it.
Elon has… all ideas? yeah man, totally.
Whoa that’s super mature.
“Stop read, block OP.”
Block shitposter.
Common conservative response
Libertarian. Douche.
This take makes no sense
Assuming he’s clueless because he isn’t an engineer lol. He has a physics and economics degree, and has started multiple successful companies. Regardless of whether or not you like him its foolish to write off his ability to understand something or execute on an idea
Also a degree does not indicate intelligence, the dude is obviously smarter than most people and has learned enough through reading and hiring the right people
Yeah ok man. I understand its hard to admit you’re wrong.
Do.....do you understand exactly what an engineer is?
Guy who literally built rocket ships from scratch is “not anything close to approaching an engineer.”
FAIL.
Buddy. Elon coded paypal. He is instrumental in all his companies technology RnD. Get a grip.
Keep crying bro
Never once said I liked him but go off queen
You can't put a label on @elonmusk, so of course you can't label him as "engineer". That would be limiting.
Humanity needs Elon to keep doing bigger, much more important things than running a stupid social media site, for chrissakes.
Yes. Hitting 3 home runs with PayPal, Tesla and Spacex was total luck.
His track record seems to be better than average, to be honest.
"How DARE someone tell me that a view I do not hold is valid! I will stop them from speaking. Because I am a free speech absolutist."
๐คก๐คก๐คก
Yeah i disagree with op but dont block him
Exactly ๐
Your inability to discern between blocking someone and twitter banning people is exactly why this is happening. Can't wait to hear you sing.
"I am allowed to block people because I'm not the government, so no free speech issues arise. Twitter is not allowed to block people because ... reasons.
Here’s the thing you aren’t grasping. Blocking doesn’t wholly prevent someone from using the app. They still have the ability. When the platform itself disables an account, that ability is now gone.
See the difference? Blocking on a user by user basis is a good feature.
Twitter banning someone doesnt remove their ability to speak their opinion on a subject.
It just removes it from twitter. Just like blocking removes it from that person.
I never said Twitter isn't allowed to ban people.
way to hear other viewpoints before coming to conclusions. This is a “cancel culture” action ๐คฃ
Cancel stupidity. End.
you literally have a nft profile pic, your opinion is automatically invalid
Stop read, take time to comment on the thread, then block OP so they don’t have time to reply.
Did I get that right @RonnyGwapo?
Hope he sees this bro
(No comment)
I am not a supporter of his but why is Trump banned again?
Again? Trump was never un-banned. It was a permanent suspension.
Translation: Tell me
AGAIN why Trump is
banned.
Ohhhhh, got it. Thanks.
who cares it’s social media
no one normal cares about getting chucked off twitter
only gamers n incels
“Permanent Suspension” ๐ง
Lying about the election and starting an insurrection
The mental gymnastics of this needs to happen or people will behave badly is exactly why we want Elon in charge, so we can all be treated like adults, even if some users aren’t acting like one.
….have you seen his track record? You really think he will treat you like an adult lol.
When they put a sitting president on time out anybody and everybody else became better qualified.
What a horribly stupid comment.
Ah 6 month old crypto stock account. It all makes sense
I’m pretty sure he doesn’t either. He’s just mad trump got banned (even though the dude should have been banned long before)
You have the IQ and EQ of a turnip.
Elon calls people that make him mad "pedos". He isn't an adult himself.
You don’t want Elon running anything. Trust me.
This was the right move. Although people didn't like it.
Idk about the other parts of his drama, but this one was pretty damn clear and anti-American. I'm happy he's faded to a whimper.
The “ tos” he broke is all bs and we all know it. You guys just hate trump it’s that simple
Lol, he is one of the best Presidents we've had in the past 50 years, except for his public image. However, the guy crossed the line by not adhering to the peaceful transition of power. It's pretty cut and dry.
None of which he ever tweeted. They literally took two tweets and then threw in a bunch of other nonsense for them to come to a conclusion about glorifying violence which his tweets literally didn’t say.
And apparently you are cool with the way they have been censoring people which is cool but I can’t think of any other instance in history where the people that were censoring people were the good guys.
Whatever you have to say to justify silencing a US president.
Last time I checked, a US president can't command a private company to do what he wants after breaking the agreed-upon terms. Checks and balances.
Name an influential democrat breaking the TOS.
Sorry I though we were discussing politicians .
Fair enough, idk who. I know @AndrewYang was shadowbanned in 2020 & most of 2021.
Or so he says lol
What else is new about the world?
Marjorie Taylor Greene.
What was her violation? Lol.
It's her personal account not her official account but it was covid misinformation. It was her 5th strike.
Twitter Permanently Suspends Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Account
The social media service said the Republican congresswoman had violated its policy on coronavirus misinformation.
nytimes.com
Got clapped last month
Great point
Got banned for 24 hours. Lol.
Lol, I'm not cool with censoring, but Trump crossed the line on a thin ice relationship to begin with.
Lol bro. It's not just republicans. Also, take an objective look at the world at large a counter party is a net gain it serves as a reset function. Quality opposition creates stronger ideas and people.
Look critically at your side please. I know it’s hard but these last six years is a stain on this country.
That's true of both sides. The two-party system needs revision.
Confession through projection. But what do I care you aren't in the US.
Oh, now that I look at it, it does sound like a revolutionary incitement speech. Claims of illegitimacy, "we won't stand to be disrespected like this", all that jazz.
I don't care for Biden one bit, (nor for Trump tbh) but imagine Ukraine with a US revolution going on...
Implying that Twitter saved the United States from collapse. Lol.
Nothing that dramatic, but maybe from an internal conflict at just the wrong time. Now if only they could've do something about the BLM riots...
Trump should have been banned way earlier… but hey it depends on whether you believe his obvious dangerous bull I guess
And yet there are others who glorify violence and when asked why they haven't been de-platformed the response is "we don't believe in de-platforming" world leaders.
Huh?
Which T&C he broke? And, as far as I remember, he was suspended 'temporarily' but never allowed to use it after that, which is, effectively, permanent suspension. So what T&C he suspended second time?
It is literally that simple and people do not seem to get it.
Inciting mob violence - way beyond Twitter's intended usage.
Insurrection and lying about the election and having millions believe him and then distrusting the integrity of our election process all because he lost. None of what he said was based in reality
Remind us what the Left did in 2016, again? Oh that’s right, they funded a false Russian dossier, tried to plant evidence on Trump servers of collusion, created a media frenzy with their MSM implants, then destroyed evidence (with a hammer) to cover it up…
Regardless of whether that stuff true or whatever. Doesn’t make what trump did right and it isn’t relevant for the question that was asked
Oh it’s certainly relevant
Not really. I don't recall hordes of people trying to overturn an election because of "the Left".
You can't even focus on a topic without getting triggered...
“45 bears no responsibility for his actions, his motives are pure and unimpeachable, any attempt to hold him accountable with be met with fierce deflection and audacious WhatAboutIsm™๏ธ”
Whattaboutism.
the democrats aren't left wing lmao they're centrist at best. they try to stop left wing candidates
Ain’t the Internet grand! And I’ll bet you actually believe this drivel, because you heard it on the… wait for it… internet.
Quite literally all of those statements are independently confirmed.
I have no doubt you believe that.
Actually I’m pretty sure those are all uncontroversially true. I’m not even a trump supporter.
And yet how do you remove 'the left' from Twitter? I guess that's the problem isn't it? One individual spewing propoganda versus a conceptual boogie man.
Wut… Musk just wants the twitter algorithm to be open source and available to be critiqued and improved, and any necessary censorship (mainly for tweets that violate the law) to be thoroughly and publicly explained. i.e. make it a free speech platform…
See? You’re proving the very points in this thread.
๐คฆ๐ปโ๏ธ
Did they do that through Twitter?
Insurrection is a legal term defined in the U.S. Code. Not one person was indicted for it. It wasn't an insurrection. Your misinformation is an example of social media use, as well. Propaganda thrives.
Ok sure, go ahead and defend that. Odd position to take.
this guy thinks thoughts not based in reality should get you banned lol..then majority of twitter should be banned..snowflake mentality i guess
Who said anything about banning anyone? I just pointed out that social media is a hotbed for propaganda. I'm not opposed to his right to spew his fraudulent take.
i was talking to bones
Thousands of people believed his claims that the election was stolen and those claims turned out to be made up and having no factual basis. Some of those people who believed his lies acted on that info w violence.
and how many ppl on twitter called for trumps death daily on twitter..thousands..dont see you clutching your pearls at them..hypocrisy
I didn’t see any of that but I wasn’t actively looking for it either. They should be punished too then. Little different when it’s the supposed leader of the free world
Why wasn’t Hilary banned for claiming the election was stolen and Trump was illegitimate in 2016? Why weren’t democrats punished for inviting violence in 2020?
So truth isn't important?
They will only ever digest their own accepted narrative, regardless of evidence. But when you don't ask the hard questions, the answers will never appear:
Who Owns Big Pharma + Big Media? You’ll Never Guess.
BlackRock and the Vanguard Group, the two largest asset management firms in the world, combined own The New York Times and other legacy media, along with Big Pharma.
childrenshealthdefense.org
Go straight to cash, foregoing the use of credit, and see how quick your credit rating drops no matter past history.
A ton of people (Hillary, Romney etc) have wondered why they lost an election and they’re still on the platform.
Hillary still says Trumps election was invalid.
She said it explicitly?
Concession is the admittance of defeat regardless of circumstances. She said “I lost you won” and that’s the key here regardless of any asterisk that may follow that sentence.
No she said Russia interfered with the 2016 election, which they did. As referenced by a GOP head of the FBI a GOP led Senate panel, and a Special council investigation led by long time Republican and head of the FBI for longer than anyone but Hoover, Robert Muller.
No she said Trump colluded with Russia.
Well seeing as how there is proof of Russian interference she is kinda correct and even still she conceded instead of trying to cause an insurrection but I see where you’re confused. ๐
It is fact that Russia used weaponized disinformation campaigns on social media during the elections to sway in favor of trump. If trump and his team colluded WITH Russia has been up for debate. But the smoking gun says they certainly didn’t dislike the help.
Russia meddles in a lot of elections as does the US. What’s your point?
Uhhh, that maybe the Russian picked candidate is in their best interest because it is in our worst interest, and that accepting help from a foreign nation/adversary is wrong/illegal?
They admitted they lost, duh
Hillary and Stacy Abraham’s both still claims their elections were rigged.
Don’t think that’s correct. Saying you wont win is synonymous with “I lost”
Stacey Abrams acknowledges she won't win Georgia governor's race
Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams, a Democrat, acknowledged Friday that Republican Brian Kemp will win the election. In a brief address, she said...
youtube.com
So why isn’t Hillary banned?
Actually it was all based in truth and proved but the courts didn't find "enough" in the evidence to prove widespread voter fraud. That doesn't mean it didn't happen. Especially with those dodgy electronic vote counters that were identified as counting Trump votes as Biden!!
Explain the ballot mules in Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin Michigan and Pennsylvania. I’ll wait
What’s that have to do w it?
See with your own eyes how you believe the lies and propaganda
All the bickering about the insurrection can be easily solved when fat Nixon is indicted and goes to trial. Now that will be some interesting social media culture.
Not a reason. He has a right to his beliefs
Probably crossed the line around where he became “a clear and present to society”. Basically that’s the limit where free speech ends according to our laws and court cases. He came close a bunch of times and bc of that was violating a private companies TOS
Clear and present danger* ๐คฆโ๏ธ
That’s a political decision, unless Twitter have been instructed to throw Trump off the platform, which I doubt.
Based in reality? Who gets to decide that?!
Putin and Taliban have Twitter accounts, and all you said (insurrection, election meddling, not reality based, plus war crimes) applies to them.
So you are pro-Putin and pro-Taliban?
It was the same thing when Trump got elected only that time it was Trump who "stole the election"
using twitter to drum up support for a coup after he lost the election.
If true, then that proves the point: he was banned based on a politically biased interpretation.
he was banned bc he incited an illegal rush of the capital of the country by all of his supporters.
would’ve been the same if a dem did it.
So burning cities, attacking police and burning government buildings gets you a slap on the wrist but paying a visit to your representative is a dangerous precedent.
what democratic president supported and incited riots of that nature
Barack Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Hillary Clinton
Pelosi and Clinton weren’t presidents.
how did biden and obama directly support people destroying businesses and starting riots?
also, i never said rioting or looting was a good thing or they should’ve been let off.
ur trying to argue with me on something i didn’t even say.
You can Google their speeches around that time. They were basically saying no problem
so instead of proving your own point your argument is to tell me to do my own research?
k. got it.
So you want me to Google for you? Reading doesn't seem your strong point. Right now you are just arguing for the sake
i’m not arguing for the sake or arguing.
i answered someone’s question. you began an argument about something that i was not talking about and have not actually made any points.
go touch grass man
Lol. Ignores the question and asks a pointless one. Mayors, Governors, Congressmen, major news outlets, etc., etc., all lauded the riots and destruction of property.
But yeah, just deflect the question.
if it makes you feel better:
there should’ve been more consequences for the people who did that, yes.
now, which mayors, governors, congressmen, news outlets and etc did as you claim?
Here's a few, more coming.
Disclaimer: I despised trump and his lot during his presidency (still do) and I now despise Biden. I see no difference between the two presidencies besides corporate media bias.
We can do better and be critical of all of these corrupt fools.
i also believe we can hold more people accountable. i was answering a question with my initial comment, not looking to argue.
i dislike both trump and biden.
as far as the pictures go, i hadn’t seen the last 2.
i do agree maxine is a criminal and out of line constantly.
Honestly this is really a pain in the ass to wade through lol. There is so much junk from all news outlets in the last years. There was a specific narrative around the "protests" just as there were on the republican side, calling all protests violent.
Yeah, I somehow could tell you aren't one of the many pyscho Twitter users haha.
Those are all from articles, I figured it was easier to do that than link them (paywalls from the post and times...)
agree with ya. I'm usually more vocal of the current hypocrisy/administration
Why is maxine waters still on here then?
social media regulations are often inconsistent
Bros wearing VR goggles in his pfp. Literally a Minecraft villager
Incredible stuff here my dude.
not what he said but go off i guess
You are using a framing that shows you haven’t heard the counter-argument, likely because you haven’t even seen it.
The point of this entire novel of tweets was precisely that the argument and counter-argument do not matter; what matters only is that an individual was able to use the platform to help incite a violent, real world event (all the stuff leading up to J6) and so he was removed.
literally yea i just answered a question and caught smoke
You state as fact something that was disproven, and adopts a biased framing of what was “incited.”
You continue to not understand that no one at Twitter cares about how you frame it. They drew a line from all his tweets up to the election, and then after the election to Jan 6th, then a violent riot happens. That's it. It was a results oriented decision; no Jan 6? No ban.
You know how I know? I watched Trump's tweets violate Twitter's TOS for basically his entire presidency and nothing happened to his account. Twitter made many excuses about him being inherently newsworthy right up until people got killed in the aftermath of his rally.
Ok, but if that’s the reason it supports my point. It is a decision based on the false, politically-biased premise that he incited violence.
You continue to not understand that it doesn't matter if you feel like your point is being supported, because your point is irrelevant. It is functionally immaterial to Twitter whether Trump set a bonfire or merely stacked up a bunch of wood, because the fire ended up happening.
i think he’s broken. u don’t seem to be getting thru to him
But then they are assuming some nexus between him and the fire, which is a politically-biased assumption. Others have encouraged protests at which violence occurred, but have not been banned since no nexus.
trump tweeted false statements about the results of the election, violated guidelines with his general rhetoric, and was directly tied (or believed to be) an attempted insurrection that was partially motivated through twitter.
he broke ToS
not to mention it wasn’t the first time he was suspended.
it was permanent because breaking the rules was a pattern for him, before J6
if your problem is with the inconsistency of twitter enforcing ToS then that’s a different argument.
figures from the left, right and center have been taken down.
the right just only loves to talk about their bans to seem like champions of freedom of speech
the other side doesn’t care.
because the people being banned broke the rules, and likely said things that normal people with good conscious and adoration for others don’t agree with the kind of things you have to say to be banned on twitter
That’s the politically-biased framing I’m talking about.
so instead of presenting a counter argument you want to double down on the point you made earlier that has been proven false 4 times now
You won’t accept a counter-argument from me. What I can tell you is that use of the word “insurrection” is a tell that you’ve been influenced by politically-biased framing (as is everyone in some way or another). You’d need someone you trust to take you out of that frame.
how was it not an insurrection attempt?
what did they go to do?
what did they scale walls for?
to take selfies?
seriously, im asking
i call cap
Well legally he wasn't found to have done anything in regards to that. Wonder why this isn't marked as misinformation ๐คจ oh wait I know why
This tweet was well after the action and his coup rhetoric. He only tweeted this because he was MADE to by all the people around him.
Yep. Conflate a protest about something with one about nothing. I'll let you fill in the blanks there, chief...
These tweets were before anyone entered the capital building. Timestamps.
Let's look at the Jan 6th timeline shall we? 8:17 a.m.: President Trump tweets allegations of vote fraud, 9:00 a.m.: At start time on permit for First Amendment rally "March for Trump" speeches. 10:50 a.m.: During Rudy Giuliani's speech he calls for "trial by combat".
10:58 a.m.: a Proud Boys contingent leaves the rally, and marches toward the Capitol Building. 12:00 p.m.: President Trump begins his over one-hour speech. 12:05 p.m.: Rep. Paul Gosar tweets that Biden should concede and demands his concession by the next morning.
12:20 p.m.: A Federal Protective Service officer writes in an email, "POTUS is encouraging the protesters to march to capitol grounds and continue protesting there.". 12:28 p.m.: A Federal Protective Service officer reports 10,000-15,000 people moving towards the Capitol.
12:57 p.m.: Federal Protective Service officers report that the Capitol Police barricade on the west side of the Capitol building has been breached by a large group. 12:58 p.m.: Chief Sund asks House Sergeant to declare an emergency.
Now that I have thoroughly proved that you are a complete clown. I look forward to your reply ๐คก
Uhh, you just proved that he called for order before shit hit the fan
"Go there and protest", is not "go try to take over", as much as you might want it to be
"12:28 p.m.: A Federal Protective Service officer reports 10,000-15,000 people moving towards the Capitol"
As you can see, he used his official voice to call for peace as they moved toward the Capitol. Per your own failed attempt to paint another person as a clown.
Clown.
12:49 p.m.:
Capitol Police respond to a report of a possible explosive device at the Republican National Committee Headquarters, which is later identified as a pipe bomb. 12:53 p.m.: Rioters overwhelm police along the outer perimeter west of the Capitol building.
I kept receipts from that day for people like Shiro
Being that there were throngs of demonstrators, I had a feeling there would be dishonesty and propaganda if any violence or destruction of property happened.
Lololololol. Keep manipulating those small truths.
?
There's no manipulation
He did it. In person. Pull your head out of Twitter for a second.
They don’t care much for facts or truth. As long as the lies can keep them hating liberals that’s all that matters.
You guys this is literally what he talks about in the thread.
Who cares. Nobody. Move on
Nah. I’m good.
How is marching near the capitol an insurrection?
Ah. That’s all it was. Got it. Your media really does think you are THAT simple and easily manipulated. And they’re right.
I truly have no words left for you people. Thanks for helping to ruin this country. Forever.
Remind me, when's his trial date set for?
Justice arrives slowly but cannot be denied.
Bull shit that’s the left holy grail.
Yes, that is what HE said
My guy, this is why it's a bad idea to bring the propaganda/disinformation machine back on Twitter. Thank you for being an excellent example.
That’s why Trump’s banned, so that it’s easier for the other side to rewrite history.
Facts don’t care about your feelings tho.
why is not a law and order problem, which the local police totally failed at.
are we saying such take over of America will be ok just because its not communicated over twitter.
that's an entirely different sentence. twitter has done what it could (I'm not gonna go in to the right and wrong), if the law enforcement/senate/etc. haven't done what they're supposed to that's a different problem, and it's not twitter's.
๐คฃ๐คฃ๐คฃ
Here's Twitters reason...
Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump
Suspension of @realDonaldTrump
blog.twitter.com
Pardon but doesn't a coup need a military?
Some redneck boomers wandering in to the capitol after the police let them in does not make a coup. Don't be so overdramatic. They were hardly going to install the shaman guy as the new military leader
You calling it a couple tells me all I need to know ,that's a delusional description, it's the sane as the " insurrection " mob .
It was a bunch of morons who didn't know what to do once they got in there .
thats what this platform is made for, he was using it right.
"coup" lmao
He was banned way before then.
Try again.
This is the exact political hackery that this thread dispels.
Because the FBI coerced a crowd to kickoff and storm a government building in the hope they could pin it on trump and make sure he wasn’t allowed to run for office again.
Twitter like with everything in the last two years. Sided with the narrative and banned trump FOR LIFE.
Jack ran out of patience
For promoting LIES...
Because the left got scared.
He was becoming too powerful and Democratic Party didn’t have a chance to win the election fairly! But that is subject to many opinions. I’m just one that believes in the numbers of people that I see showing their support for him. He wasn’t their puppet in the political arena!!
Cuz they didn’t want him to win an election
Craig, you’ve got a real reading comprehension problem.
Joker
Losing an election and trying to subvert democracy as part of a coup isn't a good thing.
There was no coup only democrat police massacring peaceful protestors
He made the snowflakes cry to much
And why is the Taliban allowed on Twitter?
Same, I don’t really get it. I don’t like him or his tweets (other than to laugh at them bc they were outrageously dumb) but I don’t really understand it.
Please see @jviddy above
So much drama. Where was the passion when antifa was burning courthouses, attacking police stations, and beating up old people who dared to go to the ‘wrong’ political rallies? That’s was caused Jan 6. The rest is noise.
Saying he actually won the election/ that it was rigged ??
Hilary Clinton did that as well for years.
news.yahoo.com/hillary-clinto…
Annnnnd another one.
Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’
Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview for the latest episode of The Atlantic's politics podcast, The Ticket. "We still don’t know what really happened.""There’s just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover," the Democratic Party's 2016 presidential nominee continued. "But you don’t win by 3 million votes and have all this other shenanigans and stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, 'Whoa, something’s not right here.' That was a deep sense of unease."Clinton also offered copious criticism of President Trump, saying she warned the country about her former rival, and "it was even worse than I thought it was.""I really did feel sometimes like the tree falling in the forest. I believed he was a puppet of Putin. I believed that there was relevant, important information in his tax returns. I believed he did not have the temperament to be president, he was unfit—not a partisan comment, but an assessment of him," the former secretary of state said.In August, Clinton said Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden should not concede the upcoming November election "under any circumstances" because she believes “this is going to drag out, and eventually I do believe he will win if we don't give an inch, and if we are as focused and relentless as the other side is.”The 2020 election results are expected to be delayed, as the use of mail-in ballots, which can take weeks to count, will likely skyrocket due to the coronavirus pandemic.President Trump has cast doubt on whether the upcoming 2020 election will be legitimate, warning that widespread voting by mail could be a catalyst for election fraud. Democrats have pushed for voting by mail to protect voters from having to leave their homes to vote, possibly exposing themselves to the coronavirus.
news.yahoo.com
1. Didn’t say she won. 2. Didn’t say it was rigged. 3. Still conceded the next day. 4. How did you say it? Annnnnd another one. Start at 7 minutes. Something trump still hasn’t done.
Hillary Clinton FULL Concession Speech | Election 2016
Hillary Clinton formally and publicly conceded to Donald Trump this morning after an upset defeat in the presidential election."Last night I congratulated Do...
youtube.com
Yeah, that’s false. I watched her concession speech live ๐คก
Fox news spin caption ๐ ๐คฆ๐ผโ๏ธ
Cmon man do better
Tucker did a video note on Elon taking over twitter it has all the answer why trump's free speech taken away
He did and it was
It wasn’t and he lost
You really believe Joe Biden got the highest votes in history? Even higher then Obama? For real dude?
yes, this was a MASSIVE election with way more voter turnout than last year and our voting population has increased, its REALLY not crazy to believe that. You just want to be ignorant
But 2016 was rigged by Russia for sure. I get it
Obviously. Trump was a disaster and it inspired many that would not ordinarily vote to come out. Also, many Republicans flipped because they were tired of the ineptitude and constant lies
Rigged means not auditable, the real threat to democracy being the integrity of the elections. You can thank Trump being the only politician willing to platform it. He may have ruined any chance at election in doing so but nothing is more vital for democracy. Blockchain it.
Isn’t that what every democrat said between 2016 and 2020? Including the candidate that lost?
For trying (in some ways succeeding) trampling over the Constituion.
He absolutely broke the rules for posting as defined clearly by the company.
Really? He tweeted so many provably false tweets from a position of authority that it was a problem for democracy. Ask yourself which you love more, Trump or Democracy. If the answer is Trump, move to Russia or China. Or North Korea.
Very psychopath and racism ๐ฐ๐ต๐จ๐ณ๐ท๐บ๐ฐ๐ท๐ฟ
#DPRK
#NorthKorea
#northKorean
#KimJongUn
Because
Mean tweets lol.
Yishan gave a reason in his Omega thread. Twitter management thought Trump was going to succeed in over throwing the govt and Twitter didn’t want to be a part of that. Twitter was wrong, of course. Trump didn’t and wouldn’t have.
He came pretty frigging close. A different decision by mike pence could have changed everything.
(and 6,365 other replies)