3 ms·

https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/facebook-instagram-and-twitter-provided-data-access-surveillance-product-marketed https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/fa

• bisRepetita 10y ago
  Thank you. >Twitter did not provide access to its “Firehose,” but has an agreement, via a subsidiary, to provide Geofeedia with searchable access to its database of public tweets. I really would like Twitter to share what search words were entered. It would give us a first-hand window on what government agencies are trying to monitor, usually secretly.
• hackuser 10y ago
  > Instead of ArsTechnica, why not link to the ACLU's website? I prefer journalism to the original source's post. The ACLU is an advocate for its cause; a secondary source can provide context, other sources, opposing points of view, etc. For example, compare a post by a political candidate, with its natural extreme bias, to a newspaper article about it, which includes fact-checking, expert analysis, their opponent's reaction, etc. That's the reason Wikipedia requires secondary sources for its citations and forbids primary sources. EDIT: Fleshed it out a bit.
• rhizome 10y ago
  That's nice that Twitter is able to keep this kind of thing at arm's length by allowing resales of the firehose.