zlacker

[parent] [thread] 26 comments
1. progra+(OP)[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:54:39
Doxxing adds nothing to the conversation. It’s not an opinion, an argument, or an artful expression — forms that free speech laws are designed to protect. Rather, doxxing is merely harassment and adds nothing substantive. Same argument can be made for racial slurs and the like. Anyone pretending otherwise is being disingenuous.
replies(4): >>Zigurd+O >>xcrunn+23 >>adrr+64 >>kevinm+zh
2. Zigurd+O[view] [source] 2022-12-16 02:57:45
>>progra+(OP)
Plane tracking is a significant form of OSINT for some investors.
replies(2): >>progra+Y1 >>mumumu+A4
◧◩
3. progra+Y1[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:03:09
>>Zigurd+O
That’s obviously not the motivation of ElonJet. Again, disingenuous.

If there was anything substantive about ElonJet, it would have been the statistics on jet fuel consumption, because that makes a statement about hypocrisy. They could have posted that without revealing locations, which crosses the line to singling out an individual for the purpose of harassment.

replies(1): >>Zigurd+m3
4. xcrunn+23[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:09:05
>>progra+(OP)
Trump, and most right wingers were all banned from TOS violations and harassment and doxxing. Look up LibsofTikTok and what they did too. Suddenly you change your tube on “free speech absolutely” back to something even more obscured. Good job.
replies(2): >>progra+C3 >>Natura+C7
◧◩◪
5. Zigurd+m3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:10:28
>>progra+Y1
The location of his plane is very relevant to anyone looking to see if he might pay attention to Tesla, again, someday.
replies(2): >>progra+c4 >>jacque+R7
◧◩
6. progra+C3[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:11:47
>>xcrunn+23
I’m personally not on team Trump or “Libs of TikTok” or whatever. If they were doxxing, then fuck them, too.
7. adrr+64[view] [source] 2022-12-16 03:14:40
>>progra+(OP)
You don't have right to privacy when you fly your jet in public airspace. Elon has a choice, he can take commercial. Just like you don't the right privacy when people take pictures of your house as proven with the famous Streisand case. Do you think Streisand case should have went the other way?
replies(1): >>zmgsab+C4
◧◩◪◨
8. progra+c4[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:14:58
>>Zigurd+m3
I’ll amend my previous statement and instead say that some people are being disingenuous and others are simply obtuse.
◧◩
9. mumumu+A4[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:17:20
>>Zigurd+O
They can gather this data through other means...
◧◩
10. zmgsab+C4[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:17:25
>>adrr+64
Private platforms aren’t obligated to host your privacy invading photos of people’s houses, if they feel those would be doxxing.

As Twitter’s policy has been, when they banned people for posting videos with visible house numbers because they doxxed the people in them.

replies(2): >>bellta+sc >>vel0ci+oe
◧◩
11. Natura+C7[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:31:47
>>xcrunn+23
>Trump, and most right wingers were all banned from TOS violations and harassment and doxxing.

This is directly contrary to the reporting in Twitter Files by Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger whose journalistic integrity and credentials exceed yours and mine combined by orders of magnitude:

"On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs:

- create justifications to ban Trump

- seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders

- express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban"

https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16017204550055116...

And the only doxxing related to LibsOfTikTok was Taylor Lorenz doxxing LibsOfTikTok, to the point that Lorenz showed up at LibsOfTikTok's house in person herself. She didn't just doxx her, she went to her house in person. There are pictures.

edit: Rate limited for telling a truth that HN dislikes again...

Here's my reply to the below:

>If they then publish your home address? Sure.

She did publish her home address, after showing up there. Some tweets containing it are apparently still up, as she complained about it to Musk in a thread about the journalists being suspended (for 7 days it turns out).

She claimed the identity of the account was of public interest on CNN here: https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/15182845369660456...

But then showed up at relatives' houses of LibsOfTikTok too: https://thepostmillennial.com/libs-of-tik-tok-exposes-taylor...

Do you mean to tell me that the relatives of that account were of public interest after exposing the account as an American woman?

It was a deliberate doxxing, by Taylor Lorenz aimed at LibsOfTikTok on purpose.

replies(4): >>Bryant+qa >>xcrunn+Sb >>md_+Tb >>kweing+Ep
◧◩◪◨
12. jacque+R7[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:33:38
>>Zigurd+m3
Or if he's visiting Russia.

The degree to which Musk is upset by this makes me wonder if there isn't something more to it than just 'personal safety' concerns fed by paranoia. It may well be that the location of his plane tells a story that he does not want exposed. Because frankly the amount of goodwill that he's burning over this makes no sense at all.

replies(1): >>wpietr+Yh
◧◩◪
13. Bryant+qa[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:48:38
>>Natura+C7
… okay, a journalist showing up at your house is not doxxing. If they then publish your home address? Sure. But a journalist knocking on your door to get your side of the story is not and has never been doxing.

And I’m saying this as someone who thinks the decision to publish LOTT’s real name was borderline, despite the fact that LOTT decided to use her real name for her domain registration.

replies(1): >>xcrunn+Kc
◧◩◪
14. xcrunn+Sb[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:58:34
>>Natura+C7
Trump has numerous examples of TOS violations and was even suspended at first for them. He was treated very differently from everyone else. THATS WHAT THEY SEEKED TO CHANGE.

You conveniently misinterpreted or even left our crucial pieces of the so called “twitter files” including that the policies of shadow banning and such were already mentioned and known.

Some of the employees were literally asking for reasons to KEEP certain right wing accounts on twitter.

They listened to violations of revenge porn AND TOS violations of Hunter Biden’s dick. The right wing really seems obsessed with seeing it because the links that were all mentioned in the docs were all of his dick LOL

LibsofTikTok causing harassment to children’s hospitals and they still weren’t even banned. No they weren’t promoted in the algorithm but there’s no right to be amplified.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/09/02/lgbtq-t...

replies(1): >>chrisb+F71
◧◩◪
15. md_+Tb[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 03:58:36
>>Natura+C7
That thread is really hard to follow.

Is the claim that Twitter changed their ToS in order to justify banning Trump? If so, can you share the before and after texts? I assume the Internet Archive would have snapshots.

Or is the point, literally, that people at Twitter discussed whether a change of policy was a good idea in the context of the Jan 6 insurrection? In which case, like...wouldn't you sort of expect them to have conversations about the fitness of the ToS to an unprecedented situation? That sounds like doing their jobs competently, no?

replies(1): >>xcrunn+ad
◧◩◪
16. bellta+sc[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:02:41
>>zmgsab+C4
From: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376?lang...

Elon Musk @elonmusk "I simply mean that which matches the law.

I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law.

If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect.

Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people."

◧◩◪◨
17. xcrunn+Kc[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:04:46
>>Bryant+qa
Omg I posted public info on the internet and I’m being called on it!!

(Besides the fact that Elon literally doxxed his former employee trying to insinuate he is a pedo)

◧◩◪◨
18. xcrunn+ad[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:07:32
>>md_+Tb
I’m personally waiting for the “twitter files” from the last couple weeks. Surely, with his commitment to transparency he will release them.
replies(1): >>chrisb+a81
◧◩◪
19. vel0ci+oe[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:14:44
>>zmgsab+C4
It seems most people aren't arguing Musk doesn't have the right to ban this, they're just pointing out that literally a couple of weeks ago Musk said this exact account was an example of free speech he would protect.

If Musk hadn't been making a big deal about supporting free speech for the last several months there wouldn't be a problem with him banning all these accounts. It's his platform he can do what he wants. dang can ban me at any time here, it's kind of his party in many ways. But dang isn't running around claiming to support all forms of legal speech, he's made a point he's trying to enforce his and the team's ideas of community guidelines.

replies(1): >>adrr+b81
20. kevinm+zh[view] [source] 2022-12-16 04:36:23
>>progra+(OP)
This list of things free speech protects doesn't include statements of fact?
◧◩◪◨⬒
21. wpietr+Yh[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 04:38:42
>>jacque+R7
For me the simpler explanation is that he had a legitimately scary experience involving his child. Combine that with the (self-inflicted) stress of his last few months, his thin-skinned nature, and him firing anybody at Twitter with a backbone and it seems very plausible to me that he's lashing out and thinking he's doing great.

Somebody described his Twitter purchase as "fragile narcissist buys criticism factory", so I think he has wedged himself into a situation that his ego makes both intolerable and inescapable. If he had somebody in his life to talk sense into him ("honey, put down your phone and come to bed"), I'd expect him to walk away and consider it rationally. But here I could imagine him continuing to spiral for quite a while.

To me, it's tragic in the way that Rudy Giuliani or Kanye West is: too much success can create the conditions for a long, lonely downward slide.

◧◩◪
22. kweing+Ep[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 05:28:24
>>Natura+C7
> "On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs:

> - create justifications to ban Trump

> - seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders

> - express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban"

Funnily enough this is literally exactly what Musk has done in the last 24 hours with regard to the @ElonJet account and the people reporting on it.

◧◩◪◨
23. chrisb+F71[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 11:46:29
>>xcrunn+Sb
> the policies of shadow banning and such were already mentioned and known.

They were "known" in the same sense that everybody already "knew" that the US government spies on us before Snowden leaked the details.

Twitter claimed that they didn't shadowban - in fact there's a tweet out there somewhere (I think I saw it shared in one of the Twitter Files threads itself) in which Jack Dorsey himself explicitly denies that Twitter shadowbans. To claim that the Files didn't reveal any new information is utterly disingenuous.

replies(1): >>xcrunn+Y22
◧◩◪◨⬒
24. chrisb+a81[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 11:50:48
>>xcrunn+ad
Are you being ironic? I'm genuinely not sure if I understand what you're saying. You know the Twitter files have been released, right? Or has HN really done that good a job of burying discussion on them?
replies(1): >>xcrunn+9r2
◧◩◪◨
25. adrr+b81[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 11:50:58
>>vel0ci+oe
He also has no problems violating his on rules and is asking his followers to doxx someone. Appropriate solution is file a police report which he didn't do.

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1603235998263123969?s=20...

◧◩◪◨⬒
26. xcrunn+Y22[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 17:06:51
>>chrisb+F71
What they reviewed is a normal process of a moderation group. There’s nothing explosive in them.

Interesting how you moved on from “government involvement” when everyone realizes Biden campaign wasn’t the government and it was dick picks they were trying to remove.

Shadowban was literally talked about earlier this year. https://www.theverge.com/2022/4/5/23012046/twitter-prisoner-...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
27. xcrunn+9r2[view] [source] [discussion] 2022-12-16 19:00:23
>>chrisb+a81
Twitter files referring to internal communications on these latest decisions.
[go to top]