4 ms·

What I find interesting about Twitter hatred is that it is all related to the platform slowly shifting towards not engaging in politically one-sided censorship

What I find interesting about Twitter hatred is that it is all related to the platform slowly shifting towards not engaging in politically one-sided censorship and cancellation. That's it. Nothing else. Call it freedom of speech if you must. This continues to expose the holes in an ideology that purports to be for A and it is nearly always for B in almost everything they say. Pick any area A, listen to what they claim and then watch B is what they actually do. In this case, it is about such topics as open-mindedness, inclusion, tolerance, acceptance, objectivity, seeking truth, balance, unity, representing everyone, etc. What they actually do is almost always the opposite to these and other concepts. If Twitter/Musk came out on Monday, proclaimed to revese course and go all-in on one sided moderation in favor of that ideology, the company and Musk would be hailed as heroes by every single person, politician and entity currently at war with them. That, right there, should make everyone take pause and think. Why? All you have to do is imagine a world where the opposite ideology controls all media and thought drivers. That would be just as much of a nightmare as what we have managed to walk into today. We do not want either ideology to hold a monopoly of control over what messages are allowed and who can speak. That is precisely what happens in nations we all agree are, at a minimum, oppressive and abusive to their population. Sadly, we have veered more and more in that direction over the last couple of decades. There are people out there who's entire careers have been destroyed just for having opposing thoughts. That isn't supposed to happen in the western world. That is not supposed to happen in the US. Yet, it has. And we have to fix it. Equilibrium in social and traditional media exists when both ideological camps have about the same number of things to not be happy about. It also happens when no particular "tribe" can exercise overwhelming control over thought, media and messaging. Good, bad or ugly, that is the best formula for progress. Stomping and cancelling opposing viewpoints has never delivered positive results in the long term. Here on HN, downvoting and flagging are sometimes used this way. It is my opinion these tools have to go away or have to have a very serious algorithmic change in order to prevent their use as means to silence that with which one disagrees. Yes, this is a difficult issue online forums have had to contend with since the days of USENET. Not easy at all. A long time ago one of my mentors explained he liked the idea of "If you can't say anything good about someone, don't speak". While not a hard-set rule, the way I personally try to use that concept on HN is that I never downvote or flag any post. In the years I have been here I may have done so a handful of times. I always welcome intelligent opposition to anything I say. That's how we learn. I never downvote. If a conversation gets derailed, I might try to get it back on track a few times. If I fail, I just leave. I see downvoting as a cheap-shot attempt to silence that with which you disagree, rather than a control for quality. Same with flagging.

nickthegreek 4y ago
> What I find interesting about Twitter hatred is that it is all related to the platform slowly shifting towards not engaging in politically one-sided censorship and cancellation. That's it. Nothing else. Call it freedom of speech if you must. Are you stating that Elon’s behaviors since owning the platform has been neutral and not one sided? I feel like the Paul pelosi tweet, unbanning nazis, and hunter Biden hype has shown that not to be the case. Call it freedom of speech you say… is that what the continual ban of Alex Jones is and rebanning of Ye shows?
- robomartin 4y ago
  > Are you stating that Elon’s behaviors since owning the platform has been neutral and not one sided? I suggest a review of control system theory.
archagon 4y ago
Personally, I’m hating on Twitter because a) Musk is a narcissistic asshole and my tolerance for those types has plummeted since 2016, and b) the American right loves to whine about being censored while breaking all sorts of rules and norms, and generally acting like complete sociopaths. There is no “balance” to be had with an ideology that spews hate and lies, and gleefully supports taking power by whatever means necessary, even if it happens to make up half of the voting population. If the other side were full of Liz Cheneys instead of Trumpists, that would be a different story. But American conservatism has morphed into something completely decrepit over the last decade, and there is nothing unfair about platforms disproportionately moderating it into the ground — simply because it has a disproportionate share of rule breakers.
- robomartin 4y ago
  > American conservatism has morphed into something completely decrepit over the last decade, and there is nothing unfair about platforms disproportionately moderating it into the ground Your comment is the best evidence of the problem we are having. The messaging is so one-sided that you and others actually believe this and don't have a clear view of what is actually going on. This is where the utter ignorance of Latin American history in the US is a great failure of our educational system. Gloria Alvarez, a prominent Latin American Libertarian offers an excellent take on this history. This history represents a virtual time machine you can use to understand both what is going on today in the US as well as what not to do. Virtually everythign you see today in the US was tested multiple times in various ways in Latin America. The result: Utter destruction. Americans' ignorance of history has consequences. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkYEXS16dZA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkYEXS16dZA If you don't speak Spanish, turn on subtitles. Populism, both on the right and left, has destroyed more nations than most can imagine. What is populism? A simple example: Vote for me and I will cancel your student debt. Vote for me and I will give you free healthcare. Vote for me and I will take from them and give to you. Vote for me because you are all oppressed and I will fix it. Etc. Populism exists both on the right and left. In the US, however, the vast majority of populist-based destruction comes from one ideological side. That's just a fact. And this, BTW, is the same side that has destroyed so many nations in Latin America. The clue is simple: Look for favors or grants to large numbers of people in exchange for votes. Then go look at the net outcomes in those populations to see just how destructive it is. Populism is a mechanism for psychological manipulation. This isn't new. Rome, among other things, fell to populism. If you really want to understand the Latin American context here's an excellent intro, again, by Gloria Alvarez: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WylR8EvhnE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WylR8EvhnE One of the fundamental characteristics of destructive populism is to create division. You have to create an enemy by vilifying "the other side", whatever or whoever that might be. Once you divide a population you can apply energy and drive them like sheep in whatever direction you need them to go. If you can convince one group the the other group are "complete sociopaths", you have them precisely where you want them and the rest is easy: repeat the message, pass Go, collect $200 and votes. Today the internet allows for a great degree of granularity in crating division and hatred around a wide range of differentiating vectors. This makes control far simpler. Each group can be brought into resonance by feeding energy into a single topic. Simple, effective and powerful. And, again, used by both the left and the right to great effect. The only way to mitigate this is to break the cycle of hatred and division by walking people out of the cave and give them an opportunity to see reality, rather than the shadows prepared for them. Politically one-sided social media creates massive monoculture audiences that are easy to indoctrinate, manipulate and drive into hating everyone else. Repeat the same message over and over again and you can get people to believe anything. People actually believe that everyone who isn't "them" are evil sociopaths. Job well done. The indoctrination machine works without a flaw. What Musk wants to do with Twitter is to stop this platform being used for for this purpose. This isn't easy, it is going to be messy and it will take time. Yet, in the end, it is the only approach that will push society forward and limit the ability of populist political scum from attempting to divide and conquer.

nickthegreek 4y ago

> What I find interesting about Twitter hatred is that it is all related to the platform slowly shifting towards not engaging in politically one-sided censorship and cancellation. That's it. Nothing else. Call it freedom of speech if you must. Are you stating that Elon’s behaviors since owning the platform has been neutral and not one sided? I feel like the Paul pelosi tweet, unbanning nazis, and hunter Biden hype has shown that not to be the case. Call it freedom of speech you say… is that what the continual ban of Alex Jones is and rebanning of Ye shows?

robomartin 4y ago
> Are you stating that Elon’s behaviors since owning the platform has been neutral and not one sided? I suggest a review of control system theory.

archagon 4y ago

Personally, I’m hating on Twitter because a) Musk is a narcissistic asshole and my tolerance for those types has plummeted since 2016, and b) the American right loves to whine about being censored while breaking all sorts of rules and norms, and generally acting like complete sociopaths. There is no “balance” to be had with an ideology that spews hate and lies, and gleefully supports taking power by whatever means necessary, even if it happens to make up half of the voting population. If the other side were full of Liz Cheneys instead of Trumpists, that would be a different story. But American conservatism has morphed into something completely decrepit over the last decade, and there is nothing unfair about platforms disproportionately moderating it into the ground — simply because it has a disproportionate share of rule breakers.

robomartin 4y ago
> American conservatism has morphed into something completely decrepit over the last decade, and there is nothing unfair about platforms disproportionately moderating it into the ground Your comment is the best evidence of the problem we are having. The messaging is so one-sided that you and others actually believe this and don't have a clear view of what is actually going on. This is where the utter ignorance of Latin American history in the US is a great failure of our educational system. Gloria Alvarez, a prominent Latin American Libertarian offers an excellent take on this history. This history represents a virtual time machine you can use to understand both what is going on today in the US as well as what not to do. Virtually everythign you see today in the US was tested multiple times in various ways in Latin America. The result: Utter destruction. Americans' ignorance of history has consequences. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkYEXS16dZA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkYEXS16dZA If you don't speak Spanish, turn on subtitles. Populism, both on the right and left, has destroyed more nations than most can imagine. What is populism? A simple example: Vote for me and I will cancel your student debt. Vote for me and I will give you free healthcare. Vote for me and I will take from them and give to you. Vote for me because you are all oppressed and I will fix it. Etc. Populism exists both on the right and left. In the US, however, the vast majority of populist-based destruction comes from one ideological side. That's just a fact. And this, BTW, is the same side that has destroyed so many nations in Latin America. The clue is simple: Look for favors or grants to large numbers of people in exchange for votes. Then go look at the net outcomes in those populations to see just how destructive it is. Populism is a mechanism for psychological manipulation. This isn't new. Rome, among other things, fell to populism. If you really want to understand the Latin American context here's an excellent intro, again, by Gloria Alvarez: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WylR8EvhnE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WylR8EvhnE One of the fundamental characteristics of destructive populism is to create division. You have to create an enemy by vilifying "the other side", whatever or whoever that might be. Once you divide a population you can apply energy and drive them like sheep in whatever direction you need them to go. If you can convince one group the the other group are "complete sociopaths", you have them precisely where you want them and the rest is easy: repeat the message, pass Go, collect $200 and votes. Today the internet allows for a great degree of granularity in crating division and hatred around a wide range of differentiating vectors. This makes control far simpler. Each group can be brought into resonance by feeding energy into a single topic. Simple, effective and powerful. And, again, used by both the left and the right to great effect. The only way to mitigate this is to break the cycle of hatred and division by walking people out of the cave and give them an opportunity to see reality, rather than the shadows prepared for them. Politically one-sided social media creates massive monoculture audiences that are easy to indoctrinate, manipulate and drive into hating everyone else. Repeat the same message over and over again and you can get people to believe anything. People actually believe that everyone who isn't "them" are evil sociopaths. Job well done. The indoctrination machine works without a flaw. What Musk wants to do with Twitter is to stop this platform being used for for this purpose. This isn't easy, it is going to be messy and it will take time. Yet, in the end, it is the only approach that will push society forward and limit the ability of populist political scum from attempting to divide and conquer.