4 ms·
We're not talking about banning these posts, or hiding them, or censoring them. Just not showing them as widely as they do other posts. It doesn't even need to
by freehunter 7y ago
We're not talking about banning these posts, or hiding them, or censoring them. Just not showing them as widely as they do other posts. It doesn't even need to go as deep as "this is hateful", but rather "this has the potential to be hateful" or giving the author the ability to control how widely the message is being shared.
I see these people here trying to debate solutions like good engineers, but unless they work at Twitter, it's a waste. We can guess all day and come up with a million solutions but when it comes down to it, Twitter absolutely has the ability to control posts that spiral out of control. What they don't have is the desire to do so.
- benj111 7y agoWhat's the line between censoring and "not showing them as widely as other posts"?
- freehunter 7y agoNot every post gets shown as widely as some do. What's that line? That's where I'd start.
- ivalm 7y agoIt can be smoothly related with probability of post being undesirable. So if algo thinks it's 50% undesirable simply count it as "half a weight." Or tune this function to be whatever you want. Twitter/etc already makes arbitrary choices about what gets shown.
- lonelappd 7y agoFor every mean-spirited hate post that gets promoted, another tweet about knitting is not promoted. Why is censorship only bad if the content is hateful?