5 ms·
jumping in here, but what makes me worried is a strong power being used without proper controls, auditing, and system design. From a system perspective it look
by epivosism 4y ago
jumping in here, but what makes me worried is a strong power being used without proper controls, auditing, and system design.
From a system perspective it looks like the US Gov had elevated access to ban people, and had opportunity and reason to misuse it.
The initial rationale for the US Gov already admits this as a legit reason to ban foreign agents - "undue power/misleading influence". I hold that same view, but also consider that malicious elements in the US Government are also something to worry about, so I'd like their own power to shape the discussion to be limited and tracked, too.
- Jarwain 4y agoIt really doesn't look like the US Gov had unilateral access to ban people. Just to flag accounts for consideration by Twitter, differing from what normal users can do only in that the flag comes from a "trusted" source and moderation is expedited. If a tweet didn't violate Twitter's terms, it's been shown the Twitter team wouldn't remove that tweet despite being flagged by the govt
- lawn 4y agoIf you read the files, it does not say that the US Gov can just ban people. What they did is flag people, and then Twitter reviews the requests. I'm much more worried about the current state of affairs where a single deranged person (Elon) can arbitrarily issue bans on a whim.