Its Technical

News and events of the day
User avatar
Drak
Posts: 1543
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:02 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by Drak »

Conservatives are not being banned from Twitter for being conservative. Mostly, everyone is subjected to the same rules under the TOS. Just more victimhood crying and whining from those pushing the cancel culture nonsense. That said, I think blue tick accounts get away with a lot more than regular users over Twitter. From a capitalist point of view, that makes sense since accounts with large followings drive the earnings. But everyone should be subjected to the same standard, imo. Twitter might use algorithms to find rule breakers but it seems the most common way is being reported. Sometimes no action seems to be taken against accounts blatantly pushing violence and hate, which is frustrating. Bot accounts are also a serious problem.

All privately owned properties, social media, messages boards, have the right to conduct their properties as they like. 1A doesn’t apply here, unless we’re referring to the private companies’ rights to manage their own TOS.

But, I would like to see the Internet regulated to some degree as far as disinformation is concerned, because disinformation is the greatest threat to our democracies. At least regulations with social media sites and news and video platforms, perhaps with fact checked disclaimers. The same rules that apply or used to apply to TV broadcast standards.

Elon Musk shouldn’t be allowed anywhere near Twitter. One of his goals is to reinstate Trump, and Trump was permanently banned for attempting a coup. Donald Trump broke the TOS every day he was on Twitter and was never punished until he attempted to overthrow the government. Trump is the primary peddler of weaponized disinformation.
Last edited by Drak on Fri Apr 22, 2022 9:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
JoeMemphis
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:25 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by JoeMemphis »

ProfX wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 9:00 am Yes Joe, but Elon Musk made that statement. He claims this is a "problem" at Twitter that needs to be solved.

So - OK - you don't believe it, but you don't see any difference between Musk being in charge and the current board. Well, one is talking about a nonexistent problem. Hmmm? In general, I prefer people running things talking about real rather than nonexistent problems.

Sigh.
Then you should be asking Elon to defend or prove what he said. Not me. I don’t ask you to defend other peoples statements nor do I assume you share their views.

I don’t really care if others believe the problem exists or not. That’s is not really my point. My point is that I don’t see a need to have someone deciding for the reader what is or is not disinformation. I think the reader should be making those decisions.

You seem to think the reader incapable of making those judgements.
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Its Technical

Post by ProfX »

JoeMemphis wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 9:39 am I don’t really care if others believe the problem exists or not. That’s is not really my point. My point is that I don’t see a need to have someone deciding for the reader what is or is not disinformation. I think the reader should be making those decisions.

You seem to think the reader incapable of making those judgements.
We ban false advertising on TV, Joe. If you say "Drink Joe Blow Bleach, it cures COVID-19" ... and it doesn't do that (and worse yet will kill you if you do drink it) ... we ban those ads. Now, dunno, we could just shrug and say "leave it up to the viewer, let them investigate". Well, in an ideal world, I guess, they would, and quickly figure out not to drink it. Reality is some won't bother, will drink the bleach, and die. No, I do not think a medium (TV or Twitter) should just shrug at disinformation.

To be clear, I'm not taking the position that all falsehoods need to be policed. But yes, the most dangerous ones, yeah.

This is why I also believe if you are spreading falsehoods about vaccines, and this causes less people to take them, and as a result more die from the virus... again I think action needs to be taken.

Now look. We can debate the policy. I would mark a disinformation post as disinformation and warn the poster. If they do it again, I might delete the post. If they keep doing it over and over ... OR if it is clear the account is not a real person but a bot ... I would ban the account. Of course, I don't run Twitter....
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
JoeMemphis
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:25 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by JoeMemphis »

ProfX wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:00 am We ban false advertising on TV, Joe. If you say "Drink Joe Blow Bleach, it cures COVID-19" ... and it doesn't do that (and worse yet will kill you if you do drink it) ... we ban those ads. Now, dunno, we could just shrug and say "leave it up to the viewer, let them investigate". Well, in an ideal world, I guess, they would, and quickly figure out not to drink it. Reality is some won't bother, will drink the bleach, and die. No, I do not think a medium (TV or Twitter) should just shrug at disinformation.

To be clear, I'm not taking the position that all falsehoods need to be policed. But yes, the most dangerous ones, yeah.

This is why I also believe if you are spreading falsehoods about vaccines, and this causes less people to take them, and as a result more die from the virus... again I think action needs to be taken.

Now look. We can debate the policy. I would mark a disinformation post as disinformation and warn the poster. If they do it again, I might delete the post. If they keep doing it over and over ... OR if it is clear the account is not a real person but a bot ... I would ban the account. Of course, I don't run Twitter....
Before the last Presidential election, there were lots of folks spreading disinformation on the FDA and on vaccines in general. Many of those people started singing a different tune after the election. So should those people have been banned from Twitter prior to the election? I doubt that would be your position. Should we ban people who questioned masking or restrictive mandates? I’m not advocating for yelling fire in a crowded theatre but I am not at all in favor of people making decisions on a public forum based on what in their personal opinion is or is not disinformation.
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Its Technical

Post by ProfX »

Twitter doesn't mark things as disinformation based on the whim or personal opinion of one or more board members, they check posts against a consortium of fact checking sites like FactCheck, PolitiFact, Snopes, and for medical info, WebMD and Medline.

That works for me.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
JoeMemphis
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:25 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by JoeMemphis »

ProfX wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 11:03 am Twitter doesn't mark things as disinformation based on the whim or personal opinion of one or more board members, they check posts against a consortium of fact checking sites like FactCheck, PolitiFact, Snopes, and for medical info, WebMD and Medline.

That works for me.
I doubt Musk will be checking any posts either. The board sets/approves direction and policy.

What works for you won’t necessarily work for others. That’s the point. Once again, I’m not advocating yelling fire in the theatre, but I’m not for somebody limiting speech because they don’t agree with a particular point of view.
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Its Technical

Post by ProfX »

JoeMemphis wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:16 am So should those people have been banned from Twitter prior to the election?
I hate vague hypotheticals, Joe. But let's take a concrete example. Yes, in, say, October of 2020, a poster on twitter was saying vaccines cause autism and should be avoided being given to people. That person was a liberal Democrat.

Now, another person in February of 2021 said the same thing, but was a conservative Republican. From my POV, both posts are disinformation of the same kind, regardless of when they were posted and by whom, and should have been treated the same by Twitter.
Should we ban people who questioned masking or restrictive mandates?
Nope. Any policy decision can be questioned. You have a right to say traffic lights suck and should not be used. I will point out, though, there is a lot of good evidence they work (and this is even if many people ignore them).

I’m not advocating for yelling fire in a crowded theatre but I am not at all in favor of people making decisions on a public forum based on what in their personal opinion is or is not disinformation.
If Twitter left it up to the decision of a random person, I'd have a problem. However, they use a consortium of fact-checking sites that are highly rated and are entirely transparent. None of them are politically aligned. This works for me.

Once again, Musk doesn't seem to like this system, and says he will change it. BTW, he doesn't say what he will replace it with. That's worse.

I'm not for censoring points of view, I am for limiting misinformation of statements of false fact that could be harmful and dangerous.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
User avatar
Drak
Posts: 1543
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:02 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by Drak »

Twitter isn’t a public forum. I don’t really know of any social media platforms that are.
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

Like most conservatives, Joe has no clue what the constitution means when it comes to freedom of speech, or who that covers. I got tired of conservatives coming to this board and screaming that we were taking away their Constitutional right of free speech.

Take a government 101 class, Joe.
User avatar
Drak
Posts: 1543
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:02 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by Drak »

gounion wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 11:53 am Like most conservatives, Joe has no clue what the constitution means when it comes to freedom of speech, or who that covers. I got tired of conservatives coming to this board and screaming that we were taking away their Constitutional right of free speech.

Take a government 101 class, Joe.
Yep. This is a private board. The site owner can ban people if they violate the rules, when rules are in place. If someone doesn’t like it, then they don’t have to log in and post. Same as a brick and mortar can tell someone to leave the premises if they’re shouting hate filled obscenities on the property.
Last edited by Drak on Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Drak
Posts: 1543
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 3:02 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by Drak »

BTW, conservative social media sites ban anyone who speaks out against Trump. Like Lindell’s Frank platform or Trump’s Truth social. So the hypocrisy is hilarious.
Bludogdem
Posts: 766
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by Bludogdem »

ProfX wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 11:13 am



If Twitter left it up to the decision of a random person, I'd have a problem. However, they use a consortium of fact-checking sites that are highly rated and are entirely transparent. None of them are politically aligned. This works for me.

Once again, Musk doesn't seem to like this system, and says he will change it. BTW, he doesn't say what he will replace it with. That's worse.

I'm not for censoring points of view, I am for limiting misinformation of statements of false fact that could be harmful and dangerous.
I’m not finding anything that has musk eliminating the system or desiring to eliminate the system.

“"A top priority I would have is eliminating the spam and spam bots and bot armies that are on Twitter," the Tesla CEO said on stage during a TED event in Vancouver. "If I had a Dogecoin for every crypto scam I saw," he added.

Musk laid out other changes he'd make to improve the Twitter user experience, including open sourcing the Twitter algorithm and making the platform more transparent.

If there are "any changes to people's tweets, if they're emphasized or de-emphasized, that action should be made apparent," he said. "So no sort of behind the scenes manipulation, either algorithmically or manually."

The CEO, known for his own at-times questionable use of Twitter, tried to explain the light-touch approach he believes the platform should take when it comes to content moderation.

"If in doubt, let it exist," he said of concerning tweets. "In a case where there's perhaps a lot of controversy, you would perhaps not want to promote that tweet. I'm not saying I have all the answers here. I do think that we want to be very reluctant to delete things and be very cautious with permanent bans. Timeouts are better."

In response to users' concerns about his control over the platform, Musk said, "I won't personally be there editing tweets."

According to the Wall Street Journal, Twitter's board is prepared to throw up roadblocks in the way of Musk's takeover bid. That include allowing shareholders to purchase more shares at a major discount to decrease the chances of a hostile takeover.

Asked Thursday whether there's a "Plan B" in the event Twitter's board rejects the sale, Musk said, "There is," but declined to elaborate.

Musk said his intent is not to "maximize my ownership of Twitter."

"The intent is to retain as many shareholders as is allowed by the law in a private company," he said. "This is not a way to make money."

https://www.zdnet.com/article/elon-musk ... t-twitter/
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

Drak wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 11:59 am Yep. This is a private board. The site owner can ban people if they violate the rules, when rules are in place. If someone doesn’t like it, then they don’t have to log in and post. Same as a brick and mortar can tell someone to leave the premises if they’re shouting hate filled obscenities on the property.
Exactly. There's no reason at all to talk about Free Speech when talking about private corporations.

But Joe doesn't understand that.
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

Bludogdem wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 1:15 pm I’m not finding anything that has musk eliminating the system or desiring to eliminate the system.

“"A top priority I would have is eliminating the spam and spam bots and bot armies that are on Twitter," the Tesla CEO said on stage during a TED event in Vancouver. "If I had a Dogecoin for every crypto scam I saw," he added.

Musk laid out other changes he'd make to improve the Twitter user experience, including open sourcing the Twitter algorithm and making the platform more transparent.

If there are "any changes to people's tweets, if they're emphasized or de-emphasized, that action should be made apparent," he said. "So no sort of behind the scenes manipulation, either algorithmically or manually."

The CEO, known for his own at-times questionable use of Twitter, tried to explain the light-touch approach he believes the platform should take when it comes to content moderation.

"If in doubt, let it exist," he said of concerning tweets. "In a case where there's perhaps a lot of controversy, you would perhaps not want to promote that tweet. I'm not saying I have all the answers here. I do think that we want to be very reluctant to delete things and be very cautious with permanent bans. Timeouts are better."

In response to users' concerns about his control over the platform, Musk said, "I won't personally be there editing tweets."

According to the Wall Street Journal, Twitter's board is prepared to throw up roadblocks in the way of Musk's takeover bid. That include allowing shareholders to purchase more shares at a major discount to decrease the chances of a hostile takeover.

Asked Thursday whether there's a "Plan B" in the event Twitter's board rejects the sale, Musk said, "There is," but declined to elaborate.

Musk said his intent is not to "maximize my ownership of Twitter."

"The intent is to retain as many shareholders as is allowed by the law in a private company," he said. "This is not a way to make money."

https://www.zdnet.com/article/elon-musk ... t-twitter/
Y'all just want Trump back on Twitter so he can continue the attempted insurrections.
JoeMemphis
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:25 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by JoeMemphis »

I never said twitter was a public company. I never mentioned the first amendment, the constitution, nor did I question the legality of the way twitter currently operates. That was brought up by the two rocket scientists that state its not part of the discussion. I agree.

So instead of suggesting a government class for me I would suggest a fifth grade class in reading comprehension for them. Of course if that’s over their heads they can always go lower. 5th grade sounds about right.
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

JoeMemphis wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 2:00 pm I never said twitter was a public company. I never mentioned the first amendment, the constitution, nor did I question the legality of the way twitter currently operates. That was brought up by the two rocket scientists that state its not part of the discussion. I agree.

So instead of suggesting a government class for me I would suggest a fifth grade class in reading comprehension for them. Of course if that’s over their heads they can always go lower. 5th grade sounds about right.
You're the one whining about a company limiting speech. Just like you to say something than to piss backwards.
User avatar
Libertas
Posts: 2936
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 5:16 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by Libertas »

gounion wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 1:53 pm Y'all just want Trump back on Twitter so he can continue the attempted insurrections.
Yep, that is what these cons are salivating for.

Hoping they can take us all out when trmp gives the order on twitter.

Someone dare tell me this is an exaggeration, I dare you.' Taking us out could be physically, kill us, or imprison us or as simple as not allowing us to vote or when we do vote our votes not counted and elections not certified.

Or they will just start killing us. Or trying to.
Image
JoeMemphis
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:25 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by JoeMemphis »

gounion wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 2:17 pm You're the one whining about a company limiting speech. Just like you to say something than to piss backwards.
You claim I took positions I clearly did not advance. You brought up the constitution. Not me. Perhaps you need to take the government 101 course.
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

JoeMemphis wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 2:25 pm You claim I took positions I clearly did not advance. You brought up the constitution. Not me. Perhaps you need to take the government 101 course.
Maybe you need to read your own posts. You complained about a company limiting speech.
JoeMemphis
Posts: 1182
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 1:25 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by JoeMemphis »

gounion wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 2:46 pm Maybe you need to read your own posts. You complained about a company limiting speech.
I indeed questioned the strategy at twitter. If you bothered to follow the conversation you would see that it started with Zowie pointing out that a Musk takeover of twitter would make him a “king maker”. Nobody said anything about legality. Nobody said anything about the first amendment. The question is whether anyone needs to be a king maker versus letting people make up their own minds. Do you have a problem with people making up their own minds or do you think you need to have help making up yours?
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Its Technical

Post by ProfX »

Bludogdem wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 1:15 pm "If in doubt, let it exist," he said of concerning tweets. "In a case where there's perhaps a lot of controversy, you would perhaps not want to promote that tweet. I'm not saying I have all the answers here. I do think that we want to be very reluctant to delete things and be very cautious with permanent bans. Timeouts are better."
Seems a "devil in the details" problem there. Still don't know exactly what his "light touch" would mean, exactly. So he doesn't have all the answers? That's fine, neither do I, but maybe he should figure it out before wanting to be the new CEO.

4 Things Elon Musk Could Change if He Buys Twitter
https://www.cnet.com/news/social-media/ ... s-twitter/

Musk tweeted this week that "a social media platform's policies are good if the most extreme 10% on left and right are equally unhappy." (*) He didn't answer questions about how Twitter would measure this.

[snip]

For what it's worth, Musk's tweets haven't been free of controversy. Musk was accused of violating Twitter's rules against harmful coronavirus misinformation in 2020 when he falsely tweeted that "kids are essentially immune" from COVID-19. In reality, children can catch the virus. Twitter told Axios the tweet didn't violate its rules because it wasn't "definitive."

[snip][end]

(*) This is an idiotic criterion.

I personally have no problem with the platform cracking down on crypto scams, adding more edit functionality to tweets, or open sourcing its algorithm.... it's really this first area that bothers me.

Musk seems to believe the 1st amendment applies to what a private company allows people to say on its private servers according to ToS rules it has set and that it is somehow a "public forum"; this strikes me as philosophically wrong. He claims Twitter needs less content moderation. Actually, to me, it seems to finally be doing exactly the right amount, after early days where it did far too little.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

JoeMemphis wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 3:01 pm I indeed questioned the strategy at twitter. If you bothered to follow the conversation you would see that it started with Zowie pointing out that a Musk takeover of twitter would make him a “king maker”. Nobody said anything about legality. Nobody said anything about the first amendment. The question is whether anyone needs to be a king maker versus letting people make up their own minds. Do you have a problem with people making up their own minds or do you think you need to have help making up yours?
So you'd be okay with the former President openly calling for armed revolution across the nation against our duly elected government, and telling corporations they can't stop people from saying that on their platforms?

I mean, then, do you think the TV networks and radio stations also should be required to give these people air time to foment revolution?

But hey, I'm sure you'd be all for "free speech" if someone called you a pedophile? Would you be cheering their rights and saying that the TV stations should give them air time?

So go ahead, tell us how you're a free speech absolutist, and accusing everyone else of wanting to tell people how to think.

And I guess Elon Musk wants to crack down on all crypto scams except, of course, for his own.
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Its Technical

Post by ProfX »

JoeMemphis wrote: Thu Apr 21, 2022 6:32 pm And unless you enforce rules fairly and evenly, what’s the point? The same holds true with twitter. Biased enforcement of the rules is just censorship.
Final question, Joe. When you said this, were you saying it was hypothetically bad if Twitter was enforcing its rules in a biased way, or actually stating you thought it had biased enforcement of rules.

Perhaps I just misunderstood your statement. You tend to be vague on these things.

BTW, to be clear on one final point, since we are discussing Elon Musk's desire to buy Twitter, I will continue to mention Elon Musk's views on how the 1st amendment applies to Twitter, whether that came out of your own mouth, or not. Seems good we all agree the 1st amendment doesn't apply to it, maybe BSD will sing with us in choir, and we will all be in harmony.
Last edited by ProfX on Fri Apr 22, 2022 3:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
User avatar
ProfX
Posts: 2162
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2021 3:15 pm
Location: Earth

Re: Its Technical

Post by ProfX »

gounion wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 3:09 pm And I guess Elon Musk wants to crack down on all crypto scams except, of course, for his own.
There are a lot of scams on Twitter. Crypto scams are not the only kind.

I do notice he said nothing about using it for SEC trading violations.

Elon Musk tries to get out of settlement with SEC, says he was “forced” into it
Musk also wants a subpoena quashed, tells judge SEC "micro-manages" his tweets.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... -with-sec/

It's not just an issue because he himself has been accused of using the platform this way.
"Don't believe every quote attributed to people on the Internet" -- Abraham Lincoln :D
gounion
Posts: 4036
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2021 4:59 pm

Re: Its Technical

Post by gounion »

ProfX wrote: Fri Apr 22, 2022 3:20 pm There are a lot of scams on Twitter. Crypto scams are not the only kind.

I do notice he said nothing about using it for SEC trading violations.

Elon Musk tries to get out of settlement with SEC, says he was “forced” into it
Musk also wants a subpoena quashed, tells judge SEC "micro-manages" his tweets.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/202 ... -with-sec/

It's not just an issue because he himself has been accused of using the platform this way.
Musk is obviously a technically brilliant guy, but, like Trump, he doesn't think rules and laws and norms apply to him. He thinks he's above the law, and he thinks he should rule over everyone else. Just another guy with a terrible narcissism complex that makes him dangerous to society. He's got a lot of in common with Trump, which, I guess, is why Joe and Green Grass lionize and worship him like they do.
Post Reply