3 ms·

It's hard to quantify, but I can provide an example of a specific post that likely wouldn't have stayed up on twitter: "Everyone said Pence sold out!!! Time to

It's hard to quantify, but I can provide an example of a specific post that likely wouldn't have stayed up on twitter: "Everyone said Pence sold out!!! Time to enter the capitol. Go patriots. Echo and enter the building dont let them vote. Put pressure. We are riding in!!! Echo big" 66 comments, 301 echoes (i.e. retweets), 375 upvotes (i.e. likes) There's a torrent of Parler posts that is being analyzed, so there may be better conclusions published soon: https://parler-archive.deadops.de/parler_2020-01-06_posts-partial.torrent https://parler-archive.deadops.de/parler_2020-01-06_posts-pa... That said, I still don't support taking down a site because there's no moderation. These people won't go away; I wonder if decentralized/p2p technologies will see more adoption by the radical right for this reason.

bun_at_work 6y ago
> I wonder if decentralized/p2p technologies will see more adoption by the radical right for this reason. It seems as though there is in inverse relationship between ease of use and centralization (obviously). As communication becomes decentralized, the ability to accrue a large audience becomes more difficult. This supports the rise of ideas that can gain widespread support on their merit, as opposed to gaining widespread support via having a mass audience to start with. To illustrate: on one side, we have a centralized extreme: Twitter (or Reddit, or Facebook). On the other side we have a decentralized extreme: spoken word. Which is easier to radicalize a country with? If extremists move to decentralized or p2p alternatives to social media, they will shrink in the long run, letting the fringe ideas remain on the fringe. If all social media went the way of decentralization, we would see far less extremism in general, simply because most people wouldn't go looking for it and it's pretty hard to spread extremist ideas in a one-on-one conversation.
- MrMan 6y ago
  Yes the big problem is mom and pop becoming infected with this hate so now what was radical a couple if years ago is now literally mainstream.
Moodles 6y ago
Right. So a somewhat rough analysis would be: sample a range of "average" tweets on both platform and somehow aggregate an average "hate" value. What I'm getting at is, I understand Parler is generally a right-leaning platform, and therefore the types of "hate" will be right-leaning. Twitter is a generally left-leaning platform, so I would expect their type of hate to be generally left-leaning. So I think a tweet about storming the capitol isn't good evidence that Twitter is better. Because, for exmaple, perhaps a violent Antifa tweet would be left alone on Twitter but moderated in Parler. Perhaps some ML bot can quantity sentiment of tweets.
kofejnik 6y ago
This is still on Twitter: "On September 17, 2020 we will lay siege to The @WhiteHouse for exactly fifty days. We need your wisdom and expertise to pull off a radically democratic toneshift in our politics. Are you ready for #revolution? This is the #WhiteHouseSiege" https://twitter.com/adbusters/status/1288193793267625984 https://twitter.com/adbusters/status/1288193793267625984

bun_at_work 6y ago

> I wonder if decentralized/p2p technologies will see more adoption by the radical right for this reason. It seems as though there is in inverse relationship between ease of use and centralization (obviously). As communication becomes decentralized, the ability to accrue a large audience becomes more difficult. This supports the rise of ideas that can gain widespread support on their merit, as opposed to gaining widespread support via having a mass audience to start with. To illustrate: on one side, we have a centralized extreme: Twitter (or Reddit, or Facebook). On the other side we have a decentralized extreme: spoken word. Which is easier to radicalize a country with? If extremists move to decentralized or p2p alternatives to social media, they will shrink in the long run, letting the fringe ideas remain on the fringe. If all social media went the way of decentralization, we would see far less extremism in general, simply because most people wouldn't go looking for it and it's pretty hard to spread extremist ideas in a one-on-one conversation.

MrMan 6y ago
Yes the big problem is mom and pop becoming infected with this hate so now what was radical a couple if years ago is now literally mainstream.

Moodles 6y ago

Right. So a somewhat rough analysis would be: sample a range of "average" tweets on both platform and somehow aggregate an average "hate" value. What I'm getting at is, I understand Parler is generally a right-leaning platform, and therefore the types of "hate" will be right-leaning. Twitter is a generally left-leaning platform, so I would expect their type of hate to be generally left-leaning. So I think a tweet about storming the capitol isn't good evidence that Twitter is better. Because, for exmaple, perhaps a violent Antifa tweet would be left alone on Twitter but moderated in Parler. Perhaps some ML bot can quantity sentiment of tweets.

kofejnik 6y ago

This is still on Twitter: "On September 17, 2020 we will lay siege to The @WhiteHouse for exactly fifty days. We need your wisdom and expertise to pull off a radically democratic toneshift in our politics. Are you ready for #revolution? This is the #WhiteHouseSiege" https://twitter.com/adbusters/status/1288193793267625984 https://twitter.com/adbusters/status/1288193793267625984