4 ms·

Even as someone who's glad Biden is now president - it's a bit unnerving to be living in a time where a service bans the sitting united states president withou

by d33lio 6y ago

Even as someone who's glad Biden is now president - it's a bit unnerving to be living in a time where a service bans the sitting united states president without batting an eye but engages in legal battles to defend the distribution of child pornography on their "open platform". I guess people posting spicy takes on government happens to be more of an active risk to society than literal child predators?

ketamine__ 6y ago
People are banned from HN all the time for being rude. Does the reason even matter though? Twitter can decide who uses its services and who doesn't as long as it doesn't violate existing laws.
- rosmax_1337 6y ago
  You shouldn't compare a small and niche community like HN to a website like Twitter. Twitter is the web equivalent of a public square, where everyone gets an opportunity at a speakers corner, HN is the web equivalent of a club house, or something private like that. There are laws governing public spaces all around the world, like town squares, where people are guaranteed rights to speak. Laws like these need to be adapted to fit the internet as well, asap IMO. As much as you might like to think that the Town square analogy is incorret, because the protocol HTTPS is the real Town square, and Twitter is really just another club house. (except very big) I also disagree with that, because of the nature of social media and platform monopoly. There will ever really only be one "youtube", one "facebook" and one "twitter", certainly nowadays when these social media platforms have grown to such an extent, covering the entire globe, let alone nations! This is because _the power of a social media platform lies in it being social_ i.e., the place where you find other people. The platforms on top, stay on top.
  - ketamine__ 6y ago
    A lot of Twitter users are moving their followers to Substack. Check out what Balaji is doing. The social network MeWe is growing rapidly. There is always room for competition but the people complaining censorship are defeatist.
    - rosmax_1337 6y ago
      Not to fall into the category of being "defeatist" even more, but platforms that actually pose a threat to the established social media channels (like Parler did), get a very special kind of treatment by the "FAANG-cartel" as you might have noticed. The solution is political change, imo, irregardless of all the problems that come with policing a multinational website like Twitter.
      - ketamine__ 6y ago
        I think the argument can be made MeWe and Substack actually pose more of a threat to the established order because they are mainstream. Parler isn't competing with Twitter or Facebook because the average person doesn't want to see a feed full of white supremacist's discussing conspiracy theories.
        lawnchair_larry 6y ago
        You’re far more likely to see that on Twitter than you were on Parler.
        ketamine__ 6y ago
        It's concentrated on Parler. Are there any liberal or moderate groups using their service? Parler's only redeeming quality is that it had all of the footage from the attack on the Capitol. It would have made a good honeypot but now it looks to be weaponized as a Russian disinformation project.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
I don't really think that's a fair description of the story here. Twitter hasn't yet engaged in any legal battle; this lawsuit was filed just yesterday and they haven't responded.
jeffbee 6y ago
They didn't ban Trump "without batting an eye" they dickered about it for four entire years while he trampled all over their AUP and they didn't bother banning him until he literally tried to incite a civil war, and even then it's clear that the only reason they banned him is that it didn't work. If somehow Trump's ridiculous little revolt had succeeded in installing him as president again, Twitter would have kept him too.
- anonAndOn 6y ago
  Different take: they only banned him because he was headed out the door. Had Trump been re-elected, we likely would've seen 4 more years of dithering so as not to piss off a man who could make their lives very stressful.
  - jeffbee 6y ago
    I think that's the same take. Twitter waited until Trump was definitely deposed before they took action.
- mansion7 6y ago
  Did you read the tweets they used as justification? A man simply saying "I'm not going to this event" allows them to suddenly become mind-readers and clairvoyants, able to not only read one's mind to determine what they REALLY meant, but also how others in the future will interpret it. Even Nostradamus didn't possess such foresight. Yet actual, obvious child sexual exploitation is seemingly a low priority for them. It's just interesting, their priorities. But not exactly a mystery.

by d33lio 6y ago

ketamine__ 6y ago

People are banned from HN all the time for being rude. Does the reason even matter though? Twitter can decide who uses its services and who doesn't as long as it doesn't violate existing laws.

rosmax_1337 6y ago
You shouldn't compare a small and niche community like HN to a website like Twitter. Twitter is the web equivalent of a public square, where everyone gets an opportunity at a speakers corner, HN is the web equivalent of a club house, or something private like that. There are laws governing public spaces all around the world, like town squares, where people are guaranteed rights to speak. Laws like these need to be adapted to fit the internet as well, asap IMO. As much as you might like to think that the Town square analogy is incorret, because the protocol HTTPS is the real Town square, and Twitter is really just another club house. (except very big) I also disagree with that, because of the nature of social media and platform monopoly. There will ever really only be one "youtube", one "facebook" and one "twitter", certainly nowadays when these social media platforms have grown to such an extent, covering the entire globe, let alone nations! This is because _the power of a social media platform lies in it being social_ i.e., the place where you find other people. The platforms on top, stay on top.
- ketamine__ 6y ago
  A lot of Twitter users are moving their followers to Substack. Check out what Balaji is doing. The social network MeWe is growing rapidly. There is always room for competition but the people complaining censorship are defeatist.
  - rosmax_1337 6y ago
    Not to fall into the category of being "defeatist" even more, but platforms that actually pose a threat to the established social media channels (like Parler did), get a very special kind of treatment by the "FAANG-cartel" as you might have noticed. The solution is political change, imo, irregardless of all the problems that come with policing a multinational website like Twitter.
    - ketamine__ 6y ago
      I think the argument can be made MeWe and Substack actually pose more of a threat to the established order because they are mainstream. Parler isn't competing with Twitter or Facebook because the average person doesn't want to see a feed full of white supremacist's discussing conspiracy theories.
      - lawnchair_larry 6y ago
        You’re far more likely to see that on Twitter than you were on Parler.
        ketamine__ 6y ago
        It's concentrated on Parler. Are there any liberal or moderate groups using their service? Parler's only redeeming quality is that it had all of the footage from the attack on the Capitol. It would have made a good honeypot but now it looks to be weaponized as a Russian disinformation project.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

I don't really think that's a fair description of the story here. Twitter hasn't yet engaged in any legal battle; this lawsuit was filed just yesterday and they haven't responded.

jeffbee 6y ago

They didn't ban Trump "without batting an eye" they dickered about it for four entire years while he trampled all over their AUP and they didn't bother banning him until he literally tried to incite a civil war, and even then it's clear that the only reason they banned him is that it didn't work. If somehow Trump's ridiculous little revolt had succeeded in installing him as president again, Twitter would have kept him too.

anonAndOn 6y ago
Different take: they only banned him because he was headed out the door. Had Trump been re-elected, we likely would've seen 4 more years of dithering so as not to piss off a man who could make their lives very stressful.
- jeffbee 6y ago
  I think that's the same take. Twitter waited until Trump was definitely deposed before they took action.
mansion7 6y ago
Did you read the tweets they used as justification? A man simply saying "I'm not going to this event" allows them to suddenly become mind-readers and clairvoyants, able to not only read one's mind to determine what they REALLY meant, but also how others in the future will interpret it. Even Nostradamus didn't possess such foresight. Yet actual, obvious child sexual exploitation is seemingly a low priority for them. It's just interesting, their priorities. But not exactly a mystery.