6 ms·

Twitter is absolutely essential if you prefer to get your information unfiltered from the source. Yes, that means that there's much more noise and you have to w

by guelo 10y ago

Twitter is absolutely essential if you prefer to get your information unfiltered from the source. Yes, that means that there's much more noise and you have to work hard to keep your stream info-dense and free from your own biases. But any other source will have someone else's biases and spin, an extra layer of fog that you have to work through.

drdrey 10y ago
By definition, isn't it impossible to be free from your own biases?
- snewk 10y ago
  i always imagine'd you could get infinitely close to being free from your own biases, but never fully get there. of course, thats my biased opinion.
- tpeo 10y ago
  By the definition of what? "Bias", "own bias", or "human"? I don't know about "human", but being "biased" is something like "consistently straying from the truth in spite of available information", but there's nothing right there that says that everyone must be biased. In so far as someone is biased, they cannot be free from their "own biases" only in the same sense that I cannot think anyone's thoughts but my own. Still, nothing stops them from trying to improve. Now, if you mean that we cannot avoid living in some particular information bubble, that's not a bias (at least in the psychological sense). That's an issue of incomplete information.
tedunangst 10y ago
If you prefer information from the source, wouldn't you prefer to actually get it direct from the source and not via twitter?
- hk__2 10y ago
  > wouldn't you prefer to actually get it direct from the source and not via twitter? Unless you can meet the source in person every time you need a medium to get information, and Twitter serves that purpose.
  - tedunangst 10y ago
    Is it absolutely essential that the medium be twitter?
    - Roarosaur 10y ago
      No, but we currently do not know of/have any other medium that serves that particular niche purpose.
      - chris_wot 10y ago
        Goodness, what did we ever do before Twitter?
        GrinningFool 10y ago
        We went whole hours without receiving our critical stream of data. Frankly I'm amazed that we survived those dark days as a species.
        roninb 10y ago
        I don't think anyone in this subthread is suggesting Twitter can't be replaced (some are actually just arguing that it's the only current way to get direct, first-hand information about current events). What are you adding to the conversation here? What did we actually do before Twitter? There was a shooting at my university's library late at night a few years back and I only found out about it because of Twitter. I know about 50 people that were actually physically in the library at the time and a handful of them were live-tweeting. I not only knew what was going on, and that they were safe, I was warned not to go about 200m south at the moment (which happened to be the plan, the bar my SO and I were going to was on the opposite side of campus). When I looked the next morning, there was one (1) article about it on a local website and nothing in national or regional media. Later that afternoon a ton of info came out and hit the media, but until then, there really wasn't anything. That showed me the power of Twitter (however stupid and cliche I sound saying that [look typing?]). Just because something isn't necessary to survive as a human being, or to allow society to function properly, doesn't mean it shouldn't be fought for (again, not necessarily saying Twitter as a company, but the idea of a social network that allows for immediate sharing of ideas and news) or at the very least appreciated. Do you not see the utility or are you just being a cynic?
- duaneb 10y ago
  I can't walk across the world in the time it takes me to open twitter.
naaaaak 10y ago
Nothing about Twitter is essential and Twitter is highly filtered. Twitter actively censors opinions and trends it doesn't like. Over the summer, #DNCLeaks trended hard, only to get removed and replaced by a typoed tag that killed its discussion and momentum. The same thing happens, or trending tags get outright removed, time and again with topics related to recent Wikileaks. This censorship happens far too frequently to certain topics to be "glitches" and it always "coincidentally" favors Twitter's political worldview. Twitter also very selectively enforces rules about what it judges as hate speech and abuse. Certain people can repeatedly tweet "kill all police", or advocate jihad, or advocate violence towards those who support a particular political candidate, but the moment anyone does even a fraction of the same towards any group that Twitter is in bed with, that person gets shadow banned or permabanned. Note: I'm not advocating hate speech, merely pointing out that Twitter allows it more often than not when it aligns with their politics. Twitter had a chance to be a platform for open discussion, but its brownshirt employees chose to make it a censorship shithole. Never-turned-a-profit Twitter can go fuck itself – it's not essential and highly filtered.
- duaneb 10y ago
  Where do you get your news?
  - emp_zealoth 10y ago
    Have you seen who is on Twitters "Trust and Safety Council?" Last time it was only left wing extremists... Disclaimer: I'm in the worst spot, since I'm right in the centre, so both leftists and rightists can hate on me all day
    - duaneb 10y ago
      That's not an answer. Do you prefer to avoid news, or do you go through some other filter? Or do you just pace the world watching the news in realtime?
      - Sacho 10y ago
subsection1h 10y ago
Yes, Twitter is "absolutely essential" for getting information "from the source", and literally "any other source will have someone else's biases and spin". You've convinced me to stop reading research papers and complete my bioinfomatics education by reading Twitter. Thank you for opening my eyes!
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

by guelo 10y ago

drdrey 10y ago

By definition, isn't it impossible to be free from your own biases?

snewk 10y ago
i always imagine'd you could get infinitely close to being free from your own biases, but never fully get there. of course, thats my biased opinion.
tpeo 10y ago
By the definition of what? "Bias", "own bias", or "human"? I don't know about "human", but being "biased" is something like "consistently straying from the truth in spite of available information", but there's nothing right there that says that everyone must be biased. In so far as someone is biased, they cannot be free from their "own biases" only in the same sense that I cannot think anyone's thoughts but my own. Still, nothing stops them from trying to improve. Now, if you mean that we cannot avoid living in some particular information bubble, that's not a bias (at least in the psychological sense). That's an issue of incomplete information.

tedunangst 10y ago

If you prefer information from the source, wouldn't you prefer to actually get it direct from the source and not via twitter?

hk__2 10y ago
> wouldn't you prefer to actually get it direct from the source and not via twitter? Unless you can meet the source in person every time you need a medium to get information, and Twitter serves that purpose.
- tedunangst 10y ago
  Is it absolutely essential that the medium be twitter?
  - Roarosaur 10y ago
    No, but we currently do not know of/have any other medium that serves that particular niche purpose.
    - chris_wot 10y ago
      Goodness, what did we ever do before Twitter?
      - GrinningFool 10y ago
        We went whole hours without receiving our critical stream of data. Frankly I'm amazed that we survived those dark days as a species.
      - roninb 10y ago
        I don't think anyone in this subthread is suggesting Twitter can't be replaced (some are actually just arguing that it's the only current way to get direct, first-hand information about current events). What are you adding to the conversation here? What did we actually do before Twitter? There was a shooting at my university's library late at night a few years back and I only found out about it because of Twitter. I know about 50 people that were actually physically in the library at the time and a handful of them were live-tweeting. I not only knew what was going on, and that they were safe, I was warned not to go about 200m south at the moment (which happened to be the plan, the bar my SO and I were going to was on the opposite side of campus). When I looked the next morning, there was one (1) article about it on a local website and nothing in national or regional media. Later that afternoon a ton of info came out and hit the media, but until then, there really wasn't anything. That showed me the power of Twitter (however stupid and cliche I sound saying that [look typing?]). Just because something isn't necessary to survive as a human being, or to allow society to function properly, doesn't mean it shouldn't be fought for (again, not necessarily saying Twitter as a company, but the idea of a social network that allows for immediate sharing of ideas and news) or at the very least appreciated. Do you not see the utility or are you just being a cynic?
duaneb 10y ago
I can't walk across the world in the time it takes me to open twitter.

naaaaak 10y ago

Nothing about Twitter is essential and Twitter is highly filtered. Twitter actively censors opinions and trends it doesn't like. Over the summer, #DNCLeaks trended hard, only to get removed and replaced by a typoed tag that killed its discussion and momentum. The same thing happens, or trending tags get outright removed, time and again with topics related to recent Wikileaks. This censorship happens far too frequently to certain topics to be "glitches" and it always "coincidentally" favors Twitter's political worldview. Twitter also very selectively enforces rules about what it judges as hate speech and abuse. Certain people can repeatedly tweet "kill all police", or advocate jihad, or advocate violence towards those who support a particular political candidate, but the moment anyone does even a fraction of the same towards any group that Twitter is in bed with, that person gets shadow banned or permabanned. Note: I'm not advocating hate speech, merely pointing out that Twitter allows it more often than not when it aligns with their politics. Twitter had a chance to be a platform for open discussion, but its brownshirt employees chose to make it a censorship shithole. Never-turned-a-profit Twitter can go fuck itself – it's not essential and highly filtered.

duaneb 10y ago
Where do you get your news?
- emp_zealoth 10y ago
  Have you seen who is on Twitters "Trust and Safety Council?" Last time it was only left wing extremists... Disclaimer: I'm in the worst spot, since I'm right in the centre, so both leftists and rightists can hate on me all day
  - duaneb 10y ago
    That's not an answer. Do you prefer to avoid news, or do you go through some other filter? Or do you just pace the world watching the news in realtime?
    - Sacho 10y ago

subsection1h 10y ago

Yes, Twitter is "absolutely essential" for getting information "from the source", and literally "any other source will have someone else's biases and spin". You've convinced me to stop reading research papers and complete my bioinfomatics education by reading Twitter. Thank you for opening my eyes!

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]