zlacker

[return to "Twitter applies 7-day suspension to half a dozen journalists"]
1. barbar+Ae[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:00:08
>>prawn+(OP)
> Update: Musk just weighed in on the suspensions, characterizing them as intentional. “Same doxxing rules apply to “journalists” as to everyone else,” he tweeted in a reply.

> It’s worth noting that the policy these accounts violated, a prohibition against sharing “live location information,” is only 24 hours old.

It seems like a good rule, but in this case the application of the rule seems less impersonal than it could be

Let’s try to make a comment that creates less outrage than most…

This is why it would be interesting to post public information about politicians collected from the online spyware that tracks all of us. It would rapidly motivate new laws that at least somewhat improve privacy.

This always happens when rule makers are personally affected by a problem: the problem starts getting attention

◧◩
2. softwa+0s[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:17:28
>>barbar+Ae
I have this crazy idea.. If only there was.. now hear me out

Some type of team at Twitter that could look at more tweets.. the resources to look at ALL of Twitter.., systematically, for these issues of “trust” and “safety”

You could the create a very clear policy, and work to remove any doubt such a policy was consistently enforced!

I know crazy idea..

◧◩◪
3. eric_c+3H1[view] [source] 2022-12-16 14:34:26
>>softwa+0s
That idea failed. Such teams will always be corrupt. Trust and Safety teams might as well be named what they are: Ideological Control teams.
◧◩◪◨
4. mindsl+5o2[view] [source] 2022-12-16 17:38:17
>>eric_c+3H1
A more accurate label would be "Ideologue Strawman" teams. The idea failed, but not for the reason you think - even when doing a decent job with a very hard problem, the corner cases create a lightning rod for criticism that results in a breakdown of public trust.

But still, a bureaucratic committee that produces relatively stable results instills a lot more trust than a single forum addict who then buys the forum so he can ban anyone who argues with him.

We, which very much includes myself, had come to take bureaucracies for granted. We focused on their failures, got frustrated at their stifling nature, and concluded the whole concept was worth raging against. But the resulting rise of individual-autocratic personalities has shown the value that bureaucracy had been bringing - slow moving predictability. All hail our Beige overlords?

Having said that, on the larger topic, I've been waiting for "web 2.0" to be revealed as the authoritarian dumpster fire it is since someone coined the term "AJAX". The obvious answer is decentralized systems that get the meddlesome third parties out of our personal interactions completely. And if this rampaging petty tyrant will help many more people to realize the intrinsic tyranny of centralized webapps, then I guess these events are a good thing?

[go to top]