8 ms·
It's become popular to pick on Twitter since they've previously made some shit decisions about how to handle free speech and user rights. My thought is that any
by sporkenfang 11y ago
It's become popular to pick on Twitter since they've previously made some shit decisions about how to handle free speech and user rights. My thought is that any company handling user data and accounts that state-level actors might want access to is at fault; the very least they can do for user privacy (and rights) is tell those users that someone is targeting them.
from the story:
> Twitter is not alone in starting to alert users targeted by state actors. Facebook did so beginning its notification service in October, followed by Twitter on Dec 14 and Yahoo eight days later.
and with regard to
> “However that [Twitter stays] quiet now does probably more harm,” Kubieziel said. “Some people suspect that Twitter might have received some gag order and isn’t allowed to say anything. However, even if it was only some bad algorithm which misjudged the situation, it would be better to tell the truth. I think it would help many of us to sleep better.”
it seems most likely to me that, yeah, they've been told not to tell who it is that wants the info.
- zitterbewegung 11y agoThe real problem is that you don't know what to conclude if they are silent or not. In theory we don't have proof of either outcome but it is prudent to assume the worst.
- sporkenfang 11y agoI'm not sure why this is a problem, considering that if one nation-level party is interested in you, probably multiple are? As long as the users in question know someone is poking around, they can take steps to reduce their online presence, or migrate to new online identities, at the very least. The point I suppose I was trying to make is it sounds like a lot of finger pointing since people are afraid and don't know whose door to bang on.