zlacker

[parent] [thread] 17 comments
1. bmarqu+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:17:59
> While we don’t know what’s going on here yet, it’s possible that the suspensions are the result of automated content moderation gone awry. Some of the suspended accounts shared Mastodon and ElonJet’s Twitter handles as well as images of the tweet that appears to have gotten the former account suspended.

Automation gone crazy. I'm likely to believe this explanation rather than Musk personally hitting the "suspend" button on stuff he doesn't like.

replies(3): >>input_+F >>Havoc+i1 >>enumjo+e2
2. input_+F[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:21:59
>>bmarqu+(OP)
Wouldn't be too sure about that:

> Same doxxing rules apply to “journalists” as to everyone else

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603573725978275841

replies(4): >>bmarqu+h2 >>killdo+G2 >>ipqk+Q4 >>dekhn+m8
3. Havoc+i1[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:25:39
>>bmarqu+(OP)
The fact that the ADS-b exchange account got banned too points towards at least some personal suspend button pushing happening on things that don’t suit Musk
4. enumjo+e2[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:32:26
>>bmarqu+(OP)
> I'm likely to believe this explanation rather than Musk personally hitting the "suspend" button on stuff he doesn't like.

It’s amazing to me that despite despite several data points showing Musk would be capable of doing this, people are still giving him the benefit of the doubt.

That’s the power of personal branding.

replies(4): >>bmarqu+x2 >>ethanb+E2 >>ajross+J3 >>tsol+X4
◧◩
5. bmarqu+h2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:32:34
>>input_+F
If the algorithm is suspending accounts that shared screenshots Elon doesn't like (matching via checksum) then it's banning regardless if the account belongs to a journalist or not.
replies(1): >>ceejay+G5
◧◩
6. bmarqu+x2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:34:09
>>enumjo+e2
Oh I'm not saying I agree with the banning, I'm just saying he would have someone write an algorithm to do it to save time.
replies(1): >>static+ga
◧◩
7. ethanb+E2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:34:28
>>enumjo+e2
Man sits up late every night shitposting and firing people on his new $44B social network, yet no way he’s sitting there banning people because they were mean to him. Utterly inconceivable!
◧◩
8. killdo+G2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:34:58
>>input_+F
The sudden spike of the use of the word "journalists" as a slur from the right is pretty wild to see in real time.
replies(3): >>George+U4 >>elmepo+n5 >>dpkirc+Mu
◧◩
9. ajross+J3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:39:55
>>enumjo+e2
I don't know that it has to be "benefit of the doubt", really. He's fired 2/3 of the company, it's very easy to imagine bugs not being caught before they reach production.
◧◩
10. ipqk+Q4[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:46:25
>>input_+F
Those quotes around the word journalists are carrying a lot of weight.
◧◩◪
11. George+U4[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:46:35
>>killdo+G2
Unfortunately, many people who call themselves "journalists," and especially those who brag about it, deserve the ridicule. Journalism was more honest when it was a lower-status job.

(Ridiculousness does not justify censorship, of course! Elon's actions and hypocrisy are indefensible)

◧◩
12. tsol+X4[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:46:52
>>enumjo+e2
>That’s the power of personal branding.

It's not because of branding, it's because he could do it himself. It's just unnecessarily complex. It's annoying to be accused of falling for branding if you do anything but automatically assume the absolute worst at all times. That kind of rhetoric makes any discussions about musk thoroughly annoying

◧◩◪
13. elmepo+n5[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:48:24
>>killdo+G2
Is it really that much of a spike though? There's always been a bias against "liberal media elite" from conservatives for at least a decade now. It's increased, sure, but I don't think by that much.
◧◩◪
14. ceejay+G5[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 02:49:33
>>bmarqu+h2
Which is bad, because the supposed policy has a specific media exemption.

https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/personal-info...

replies(1): >>monoca+ta
◧◩
15. dekhn+m8[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:01:58
>>input_+F
"Never pick a fight with somebody who publishes bits by the barrel"
◧◩◪
16. static+ga[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:12:18
>>bmarqu+x2
Why would he need an algorithm?

Do wealthy people not have assistants?

"Smithers, ban those guys making fun of me!"

◧◩◪◨
17. monoca+ta[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:13:51
>>ceejay+G5
Interestingly it also explicitly says that you won't get permanently suspended unless your account is dedicated to live updates, or you do it again after being locked out and deleting the content.

Damn, couldn't even follow his own policy for 24 hours since the accounts seemed to have been banned with no warning.

> Sharing private or live location information:

> The first time you violate this policy by sharing private information (such as home address, identity documents etc.), we will require you to remove this content. We will also temporarily lock you out of your account before you can Tweet again. If you violate this policy by posting private information again after your first warning, your account will be permanently suspended.

> If your account is dedicated to sharing someone’s live location, your account will be automatically suspended.

◧◩◪
18. dpkirc+Mu[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 05:18:45
>>killdo+G2
See also: scientists, doctors, college graduates.
[go to top]