9 ms·

Given what’s been found with Twitters censorship and governmental collusion, curious if the data they have is in the same vein and how people will react to it -

Given what’s been found with Twitters censorship and governmental collusion, curious if the data they have is in the same vein and how people will react to it - if what they say is true

RandomLensman 3y ago
Looks to me most people didn't care about any of that in relation to Twitter.
- logicchains 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    I would have guessed not more than 10% of the population care either way - but happy to be proven wrong.
threeseed 3y ago
> Twitters censorship and governmental collusion Also known as complying with local laws. It's always amusing when Americans realise that most of the world doesn't ascribe to their views on free speech. And in fact governments with broad support from their citizens want social media companies to be regulated.
- tyingq 3y ago
  >Also known as complying with local laws That's one form of "censorship and governmental collusion". There are others. Parts of government collude with companies outside of actual law too.
- yonaguska 3y ago
  Suppressing news stories and users at the behest of the FBI has nothing to do with complying with local laws. Let's not forget that Twitter was actively becoming a host for child porn at the same time, and not addressing that issue simultaneously.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    "Let's not forget that Twitter was actively becoming a host for child porn at the same time" I never knew in the first place. Is this a solid fact? I find it hard to imagine people sharing cp via twitter.
    - infecto 3y ago
      Anecdotal but they did have a pretty active team around the time identifying CP and terrorist beheading type videos/images. They did have a pretty big issue with terrorist orgs using Twitter, would not surprise me CP made its way there.
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        Terrorists want the maximum attention for their videos. Pedophiles usually not, so I really do not see a connection.
    - yonaguska 3y ago
      https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/elon-musks-says-the-issue-of-child-sexual-exploitation-content-on-twitter-is-priority-1/articleshow/95668308.cms https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/elon-musks-says-the... And personally, yes, I came across accounts that were doing this. Seemed like they were mostly based outside of the USA, and the exploitation is usually something along the lines of someone using existing porn, advertising a series of link shorteners to access said porn, then profiting from the ad clicks. This is probably not profitable for anyone in a developed country, and is also probably only profitable due to child porn being outright banned from most of the internet, with no free access to material, people will jump through hoops to access said material. I'd been reporting those accounts for years to no avail until recently. Instagram has the same issue. I gave up on reporting on Instagram as I couldn't stomach seeing this stuff and my reports never had any results. The people sharing this stuff on Instagram fall into a few categories, occasionally parents, and other adults selling access to pictures/videos of their young children and toddlers in bikinis, something that would otherwise not be sexual, except that they are selling to an audience that is sexualizing it. Instagram will not take any of this down as it's not technically nudity. Maybe it's changed though. The other class of abusers are usually non USA based, and they'll exploit Instagram live to share, multiple broadcasters will be streaming, but one will be broadcasting hardcore child porn. You can only report one host of the stream, and by the time anyone looks at it, presumably, they've switched to another account to stream. It will usually be another broadcaster that was on the previous stream. I couldn't continue spending time reporting this stuff due to the hardcore nature of it. Instagram really needs to fix their reporting and allow reporting of every single broadcaster that is part of a live stream.
- throw_m239339 3y ago
  > Also known as complying with local laws. No. The US executive branch via government agency can't tell a website to silence speech, that's a violation of the first amendement. That's exactly what happened with Twitter. Twitter didn't comply with any law, Twitter just did the binding of the US executive branch when it came to censorship. Completely unlawful.
  - RandomLensman 3y ago
    Was it unlawful for Twitter to voluntary do so?
    - thepangolino 3y ago
      [dead]
  - sandworm101 3y ago
    I think they can. Twitter isnt a public forum. It is a private entity. They very much can shut down any speech they want. They can also do so in response to government requests. Pure unbridled freedom of speech only really exists in public spaces. The insides of privately-owned servers are not a streetcorner, courthouse step or city park.
    - bombolo 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - sandworm101 3y ago
        Lol. Dont assume that anyone with a bit of american legal knowledge is automatically also an american.
        dang 3y ago
        Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- mikrotikker 3y ago
  Free Speech should be America's #1 export. Non compliance with censorship may make other countries block American sites, but then they have to deal with their citizens angry they don't have access to the service because of arbitrary information restriction.
  - threeseed 3y ago
    The world doesn't want America's version of free speech. They prefer a more managed version of it where hate speech, doxxing, abuse, defamation etc aren't rampant.
    - mikrotikker 3y ago
      Speak for yourself. Free speech is a core part of democracy. America has the purest form.
viraptor 3y ago
That's a weird summary on what's been released from Twitter. They've been shown to do moderation and to receive issue reports both from users and third parties including gov sources. That's far from collusion. Specifically, (unless I missed some document) they received reports and acted on them independently. There were cases of "report received and acted on", but no proof of "action forced even though employee disagreed".
- kcatskcolbdi 3y ago
  Jack Dorsey has publicly stated he capitulated to the Indian government to censor around the Farmers protests because the Indian government was raiding employees homes and threatening to shut down service in the country. [1] 1. https://time.com/6286814/india-twitter-jack-dorsey-clash/ https://time.com/6286814/india-twitter-jack-dorsey-clash/
  - kramerger 3y ago
    1. That's not really "governmental collusion"? 2. Elon Musk: https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-05-24/under-elon-musk-twitter-has-approved-83-of-censorship-requests-by-authoritarian-governments.html https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-05-24/under-el... This whole Twitter Files thing was embarrassing mundane and the amount of censoring twitter does right now is 100x worse. Just look at the Turkish elections...
    - kcatskcolbdi 3y ago
      1. I didn't state that it was. I was replying to the individual who made the claim "There were cases of "report received and acted on", but no proof of "action forced even though employee disagreed".". The censoring of Indian farmers is the clearest example of this claim being false. 2. It is also bad when Elon Musk does it. I am not interested in any back and forth of "well ackshually now its this percentage worse", I only have a desire for it to stop entirely.
  - viraptor 3y ago
    Temporarily complying then reverting the censorship in 2021 then suing the Indian gov in 2022 is not "capitulation". Only recently did Twitter stop fighting back and Musk just announced it - it wasn't something hidden.
torpid 3y ago
The people hacking this and those behind the reddit blackout are not interested in preventing censorship or government collusion for these activities.. in fact, I would argue thats likely the MOTIVE, because its no longer free and anonymous.

Given what’s been found with Twitters censorship and governmental collusion, curious if the data they have is in the same vein and how people will react to it - if what they say is true

RandomLensman 3y ago

Looks to me most people didn't care about any of that in relation to Twitter.

logicchains 3y ago
[flagged]
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  I would have guessed not more than 10% of the population care either way - but happy to be proven wrong.

threeseed 3y ago

> Twitters censorship and governmental collusion Also known as complying with local laws. It's always amusing when Americans realise that most of the world doesn't ascribe to their views on free speech. And in fact governments with broad support from their citizens want social media companies to be regulated.

tyingq 3y ago
>Also known as complying with local laws That's one form of "censorship and governmental collusion". There are others. Parts of government collude with companies outside of actual law too.
yonaguska 3y ago
Suppressing news stories and users at the behest of the FBI has nothing to do with complying with local laws. Let's not forget that Twitter was actively becoming a host for child porn at the same time, and not addressing that issue simultaneously.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "Let's not forget that Twitter was actively becoming a host for child porn at the same time" I never knew in the first place. Is this a solid fact? I find it hard to imagine people sharing cp via twitter.
  - infecto 3y ago
    Anecdotal but they did have a pretty active team around the time identifying CP and terrorist beheading type videos/images. They did have a pretty big issue with terrorist orgs using Twitter, would not surprise me CP made its way there.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      Terrorists want the maximum attention for their videos. Pedophiles usually not, so I really do not see a connection.
  - yonaguska 3y ago
    https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/elon-musks-says-the-issue-of-child-sexual-exploitation-content-on-twitter-is-priority-1/articleshow/95668308.cms https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/elon-musks-says-the... And personally, yes, I came across accounts that were doing this. Seemed like they were mostly based outside of the USA, and the exploitation is usually something along the lines of someone using existing porn, advertising a series of link shorteners to access said porn, then profiting from the ad clicks. This is probably not profitable for anyone in a developed country, and is also probably only profitable due to child porn being outright banned from most of the internet, with no free access to material, people will jump through hoops to access said material. I'd been reporting those accounts for years to no avail until recently. Instagram has the same issue. I gave up on reporting on Instagram as I couldn't stomach seeing this stuff and my reports never had any results. The people sharing this stuff on Instagram fall into a few categories, occasionally parents, and other adults selling access to pictures/videos of their young children and toddlers in bikinis, something that would otherwise not be sexual, except that they are selling to an audience that is sexualizing it. Instagram will not take any of this down as it's not technically nudity. Maybe it's changed though. The other class of abusers are usually non USA based, and they'll exploit Instagram live to share, multiple broadcasters will be streaming, but one will be broadcasting hardcore child porn. You can only report one host of the stream, and by the time anyone looks at it, presumably, they've switched to another account to stream. It will usually be another broadcaster that was on the previous stream. I couldn't continue spending time reporting this stuff due to the hardcore nature of it. Instagram really needs to fix their reporting and allow reporting of every single broadcaster that is part of a live stream.
throw_m239339 3y ago
> Also known as complying with local laws. No. The US executive branch via government agency can't tell a website to silence speech, that's a violation of the first amendement. That's exactly what happened with Twitter. Twitter didn't comply with any law, Twitter just did the binding of the US executive branch when it came to censorship. Completely unlawful.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Was it unlawful for Twitter to voluntary do so?
  - thepangolino 3y ago
    [dead]
- sandworm101 3y ago
  I think they can. Twitter isnt a public forum. It is a private entity. They very much can shut down any speech they want. They can also do so in response to government requests. Pure unbridled freedom of speech only really exists in public spaces. The insides of privately-owned servers are not a streetcorner, courthouse step or city park.
  - bombolo 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - sandworm101 3y ago
      Lol. Dont assume that anyone with a bit of american legal knowledge is automatically also an american.
      - dang 3y ago
        Please don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
mikrotikker 3y ago
Free Speech should be America's #1 export. Non compliance with censorship may make other countries block American sites, but then they have to deal with their citizens angry they don't have access to the service because of arbitrary information restriction.
- threeseed 3y ago
  The world doesn't want America's version of free speech. They prefer a more managed version of it where hate speech, doxxing, abuse, defamation etc aren't rampant.
  - mikrotikker 3y ago
    Speak for yourself. Free speech is a core part of democracy. America has the purest form.

viraptor 3y ago

That's a weird summary on what's been released from Twitter. They've been shown to do moderation and to receive issue reports both from users and third parties including gov sources. That's far from collusion. Specifically, (unless I missed some document) they received reports and acted on them independently. There were cases of "report received and acted on", but no proof of "action forced even though employee disagreed".

kcatskcolbdi 3y ago
Jack Dorsey has publicly stated he capitulated to the Indian government to censor around the Farmers protests because the Indian government was raiding employees homes and threatening to shut down service in the country. [1] 1. https://time.com/6286814/india-twitter-jack-dorsey-clash/ https://time.com/6286814/india-twitter-jack-dorsey-clash/
- kramerger 3y ago
  1. That's not really "governmental collusion"? 2. Elon Musk: https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-05-24/under-elon-musk-twitter-has-approved-83-of-censorship-requests-by-authoritarian-governments.html https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-05-24/under-el... This whole Twitter Files thing was embarrassing mundane and the amount of censoring twitter does right now is 100x worse. Just look at the Turkish elections...
  - kcatskcolbdi 3y ago
    1. I didn't state that it was. I was replying to the individual who made the claim "There were cases of "report received and acted on", but no proof of "action forced even though employee disagreed".". The censoring of Indian farmers is the clearest example of this claim being false. 2. It is also bad when Elon Musk does it. I am not interested in any back and forth of "well ackshually now its this percentage worse", I only have a desire for it to stop entirely.
- viraptor 3y ago
  Temporarily complying then reverting the censorship in 2021 then suing the Indian gov in 2022 is not "capitulation". Only recently did Twitter stop fighting back and Musk just announced it - it wasn't something hidden.

torpid 3y ago

The people hacking this and those behind the reddit blackout are not interested in preventing censorship or government collusion for these activities.. in fact, I would argue thats likely the MOTIVE, because its no longer free and anonymous.