3 ms·

Here's the difference though: If the algorithms weren't politically biased... - The conservatives would be happy - The liberals would be unhappy Conservatives

Here's the difference though: If the algorithms weren't politically biased... - The conservatives would be happy - The liberals would be unhappy Conservatives' whole argument isn't "bad things I don't like on the internet" (that's the liberal argument), their argument is "the rules are rigged against my views". The conservative position is free speech. The Twitter execs were just getting grilled in congress last week and all the conservative questions were "why were you rigging the rules against conservatives ie "trans ideology" written into the rules, emails where you suppressed content in accordance with FBI requests, etc Meanwhile the liberals questions were: "why didn't you ban this conservative account? or this other conservative account? or this other one?". Only 1 side here wants to ban accounts for their political views. The other just wants LESS restrictions on speech.

BaseballPhysics 4y ago
Well this is a thought-terminating comment if I've ever seen one... Remind me, again, who is banning books? Both parties in the US are awfully selective about when they will and won't support "free speech" as you seem to define it. How about we focus on the actual issues rather than devolving to US team sport politics? Edit: and incidentally the original comment was equally thought-terminating. But, why have a substantive discussion when you can go for easy polemics.
- kevviiinn 4y ago
  What's funny is thinking about the logical endpoint of this argument: >Conservatives' whole argument isn't "bad things I don't like on the internet" (that's the liberal argument), their argument is "the rules are rigged against my views". If the liberal rules are "no bad things on the internet" and the rules are rigged against conservative opinions. What does that make conservative opinions?
  - eldritch_4ier 4y ago
    It makes them things that liberals think are bad. Likewise, conservatives think liberal opinions are bad. The problem is exactly your comment: liberal opinions are not the same thing as the truth. So just because some liberal doesn't like your opinion (thinks its bad) doesn't mean you deserve to be deplatformed. There's no gotcha there with the logical endpoint.
    - kevviiinn 4y ago
      What about when the message encourages radical violence? Messages from ISIS et al. get deplatformed but not those who encourage right wing US domestic terrorism such as Ben Shapiro or Steven Crowder? Also no, there aren't any left wing domestic terrorist organizations similar to the proud boys or boogaloo boys. There also haven't been left wing mass shooters as far as I'm aware. There may be one or two but it's far from the majority. Numerous shooters have cited far right political ideology in their writings. Seems suspicious to me, I don't think right wing voices are actually getting silenced. The opposite in fact. >In six out of seven countries — all but Germany — Tweets posted by accounts from the political right receive more algorithmic amplification than the political left when studied as a group. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/rml-politicalcontent https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/rml-polit... https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/22/22740703/twitter-algorithm-right-wing-amplification-study https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/22/22740703/twitter-algorit... So what does this all say about which ideas are more harmful? What does it say about who is actually getting silenced? The right wing media seems to love playing the victim.

BaseballPhysics 4y ago

Well this is a thought-terminating comment if I've ever seen one... Remind me, again, who is banning books? Both parties in the US are awfully selective about when they will and won't support "free speech" as you seem to define it. How about we focus on the actual issues rather than devolving to US team sport politics? Edit: and incidentally the original comment was equally thought-terminating. But, why have a substantive discussion when you can go for easy polemics.

kevviiinn 4y ago
What's funny is thinking about the logical endpoint of this argument: >Conservatives' whole argument isn't "bad things I don't like on the internet" (that's the liberal argument), their argument is "the rules are rigged against my views". If the liberal rules are "no bad things on the internet" and the rules are rigged against conservative opinions. What does that make conservative opinions?
- eldritch_4ier 4y ago
  It makes them things that liberals think are bad. Likewise, conservatives think liberal opinions are bad. The problem is exactly your comment: liberal opinions are not the same thing as the truth. So just because some liberal doesn't like your opinion (thinks its bad) doesn't mean you deserve to be deplatformed. There's no gotcha there with the logical endpoint.
  - kevviiinn 4y ago
    What about when the message encourages radical violence? Messages from ISIS et al. get deplatformed but not those who encourage right wing US domestic terrorism such as Ben Shapiro or Steven Crowder? Also no, there aren't any left wing domestic terrorist organizations similar to the proud boys or boogaloo boys. There also haven't been left wing mass shooters as far as I'm aware. There may be one or two but it's far from the majority. Numerous shooters have cited far right political ideology in their writings. Seems suspicious to me, I don't think right wing voices are actually getting silenced. The opposite in fact. >In six out of seven countries — all but Germany — Tweets posted by accounts from the political right receive more algorithmic amplification than the political left when studied as a group. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/rml-politicalcontent https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2021/rml-polit... https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/22/22740703/twitter-algorithm-right-wing-amplification-study https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/22/22740703/twitter-algorit... So what does this all say about which ideas are more harmful? What does it say about who is actually getting silenced? The right wing media seems to love playing the victim.