6 ms·

You're free to delete your content and your account if you're unhappy. There's nothing it "should" be, it's not your company. Also, it's pretty obvious that ev

You're free to delete your content and your account if you're unhappy. There's nothing it "should" be, it's not your company. Also, it's pretty obvious that everyone was training on Twitter data already before they cracked down on scraping. It is, after all, a public forum.

ianferrel 3y ago
Given how many "deleted" posts recently resurfaced, you are in fact not free to delete your content, because it won't be deleted, just hidden.
- jamiequint 3y ago
  Go through the GDPR deletion process if you care that much, will very likely be deleted because the fines are massive (4% of annual worldwide turnover)
  - squarefoot 3y ago
    I'm not sure the GDPR can be enforced outside of the EU, therefore one can't be absolutely certain the posts will not appear if accessed from elsewhere.
    - fzeindl 3y ago
      It is enforced internationally just like copyright law. It is a law for EU users no matter where their data resides. Meta was fined 1.3 billion dollars in spring for GDPR violation.
      - Alupis 3y ago
        Being fined != paying a fine. Realistically, a company is only obligated to pay the fine if they have a physical presence within the EU, and care to keep that presence. For some companies, the calculus says pay the fines and cooperate with EU laws. But for most companies, they can and do safely ignore GDPR and other EU laws. EU laws do not apply outside the EU... despite what many Europeans want to believe.
        fzeindl 3y ago
        That is your opinion. We will see what the courts say to Meta and Amazon.
        lnxg33k1 3y ago
        But for most companies, they can and do safely ignore GDPR and other EU laws. EU laws do not apply outside the EU... despite what many Europeans want to believe. You’re right but when did you meet Europeans who said that a company selling in India has to respect GDPR? You only need to apply EU regulations if you serve EU citizens, or you get either fined or blocked
  - ianferrel 3y ago
    I am not an EU citizen or resident, so I don't believe that avenue is open to me. Also, Twitter has not of late demonstrated significant susceptibility to regulations. I will note that we've narrowed the claim from "you're free to delete your content" to "If you live in some countries you're very likely to be able to delete your content", which I agree is probably true.
    - Ylpertnodi 3y ago
      >I am not an EU citizen or resident, Resident is enough.
      - Alupis 3y ago
        In a very real, practical sense, GDPR can be safely ignored for most non-EU companies. Europeans seem to believe things like GDPR apply to the entire world. They don't. If your company has no physical presence within the EU - ignore EU laws as much as you want. There is nothing they can do about it.
  - dhoe 3y ago
    You would think so! I've requested deletion under GDPR and here's what you get in response: Thank you for your inquiry. You can deactivate your account at any time. When deactivated, your Twitter account, including your display name, username, and public profile, will no longer be viewable on Twitter.com, Twitter for iOS, and Twitter for Android. For up to 30 days after deactivation, it is still possible to restore your Twitter account if it was accidentally or wrongfully deactivated. Keep in mind that search engines and other third parties may still retain copies of your public information, like your profile information and public Tweets, even after you have deleted the information from our services or deactivated your account.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    GDPR means absolutely nothing between an American customer and an American company. It's completely irrelevant. And I'm not even sure it means anything even for users in the EU. If Twitter doesn't have any offices/subsidiaries/bank accounts in the EU, then even if the EU fined them, I'm not sure how that would ever be enforced?
    - jedberg 3y ago
      Twitter has an office in Ireland and is most definitely regulated under GDPR.
      - crazygringo 3y ago
        Is it still there? I knew they did previously, but last year there were reports it was possibly closing as part of Musk's layoffs. Looking online I can't find any recent information. Basically, given the way Musk has been ignoring other regulations and/or not paying for things, I'm wondering if he even cares about GDPR. And if he doesn't care and shuts down any legal European presence, then does it matter? (Of course if the Ireland office is still active and receiving lots of European advertiser revenue, then of course the GDPR has teeth.)
        jedberg 3y ago
        My friend works there, it's definitely still there.
        Alupis 3y ago
        Perhaps not for long... Shutting that office down and safely ignoring the GDPR is probably a valid concession for a US-based business built around data collection. It's not like EU users will stop or be blocked from using X anyway.
        crazygringo 3y ago
        Thanks! OK, GDPR should still have teeth then. Good to know.
  - Raed667 3y ago
    They don't have a form to request the information to be deleted under GDPR. I have looked everywhere under help.twitter.com and they just ask you to disable your account.
- jiofj 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - nitwit005 3y ago
    Type "twitter deleted posts reappearing" into Google, and browse the dozens of news articles.
    - jiofj 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - nitwit005 3y ago
        If you've used Twitter in the last six months or so, you'll have seen serious and obvious bugs. Large numbers of people report seeing a bug. Having them all be liars seems rather unlikely.
        jiofj 3y ago
        Seeing bugs is one thing (I stopped using twitter like 5 years ago or so and it was always a bug fest so I can believe it got even worse) but we are talking about a single specific bug here with important privacy consequences. Some reliable proof would be nice.
GoofballJones 3y ago
[flagged]
- nivekney 3y ago
  > The mentality of actively opposing or criticizing anyone who defends a particular individual, organization, or viewpoint can be described as "tribalism"
  - Eisenstein 3y ago
    Tribalism is loyalty to an ingroup, not opposition of "a particular individual, organization, or viewpoint".
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dang 3y ago
  It's against HN's rules to post like this - please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Also, could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing the guidelines and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
fluidcruft 3y ago
Twitter: the public square that owns your speech.
mattdeboard 3y ago
> There's nothing it "should" be, it's not your company Well for a lot of us humans, ownership is not a stopper for conversations about ethics in technology.
- jamiequint 3y ago
  The ethics argument is asinine. If you don’t like the rules, don’t use the product or start your own company. Just don’t be an insufferable whiner about it.
  - mattdeboard 3y ago
    > asinine > insufferable whiner I don't think this is a proportionate response to a convo about ethics in tech.
    - jamiequint 3y ago
      If you pull the “we need to have an ethics discussion” card about public data posted on a website you can quit anytime, you’re an insufferable whiner. Sorry not sorry.
      - mattdeboard 3y ago
        Have a nice day.
  - singleshot_ 3y ago
    I think you may have meant “not asinine” or perhaps “I have a terrible attitude and should skip it.” The ethical discussion is kind of the entire point. We all know what the law is.
iuhaegpoinqhpoq 3y ago
If someone created an account back when AI was not a thing, they did NOT consent to their data being used for AI: You cannot expect people to retroactively consent to a thing the existence of which they were not even aware of when they gave consent for some limited OTHER use. Besides, it's just rude to do things for which there was no consent in general, no matter whether it is AI or anything else. No consent is no consent. Further, you can't expect people who have a life in general to sit around all day just waiting to figure out where they have to delete accounts before they are misused. Bazillions of websites nowadays want you to create an account, the normal behavior is that users just abandon accounts which they don't need anymore. Nobody has the time to delete all of them. Your profile says you were "Senior Director of Monetization at Reddit". Considering all the outrage that company has caused with its users as well (redesign cough cough - just one example out of a truckload), and that the outrage-causing things largely seemed to be aimed at monetization, perhaps you should do some soul seeking to figure out whether your values are aligned with common societal morals. Or in other words: How many more people will you make angry until you realize that maybe you're the baddie?
- lsmeducation 3y ago
  You most likely consented to future changes to the ToS. It's kind of like their version of asking a Genie for infinite wishes as one of their three wishes.
  - iuhaegpoinqhpoq 3y ago
    So they can just change the ToS to say "Your full bank account balance belongs to Twitter after YYYY-MM-DD" ?
    - benterix 3y ago
      Basically, they can ask anything that is not forbidden by the law. If you disagree, you can try to get them to court.
      - 3y ago
libraryatnight 3y ago
Something tells me Elon could announce he's going to shit on all your faces and you'd be like "it's his company he can do it!" While opening your mouth and looking up with a smile.
- check89 3y ago
  [flagged]
- parl_match 3y ago
  It's been entertaining watching the pro-Elon crowd shrink and get quieter as he repeatedly screws up. I'm not saying every decision he's made has been bad (some, like revenue sharing and using Twitter Blue, are good imo). But he really has been screwing up bad, and in ways that are indefensible by anyone with common sense.
  - check89 3y ago
    > the pro-Elon crowd shrink and get quieter Source? > he really has been screwing up bad, and in ways that are indefensible by anyone with common sense. Examples?
- dang 3y ago
  Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You may not owe $CelebrityBillionaire better but you owe this community better if you're participating in it.
brokencode 3y ago
I don’t know how people can be so absolutely shocked that their public posts online could be used by anybody for basically any purpose. If you want to keep your thoughts private, then maybe don’t post them publicly? If WhatsApp or another private messaging app started doing this, I’d be right there with the people calling that absolutely unacceptable. But I’m not surprised at all that Twitter is doing this, and I don’t know how anybody even remotely tech savvy could be.
- singleshot_ 3y ago
  If only there was some legal regime that turned this conundrum into a scenario whereby people could publicly share their intellectual property while still retaining control of their rights in the material. This seems so critical to a functioning society that one would have thought it would have been considered in the Constitution. Oh well!
  - brokencode 3y ago
    If you think Twitter is violating the constitution or copyright law, then take them to court. But by agreeing to the terms of use, Twitter retains certain rights over what you post on the platform. If that is not acceptable, then don’t use Twitter. If you think your thoughts are too valuable for Twitter to use, then write them into a book or blog or some other venue where your intellectual property can be protected.
    - singleshot_ 3y ago
      I do not think Twitter is violating the Constitution unless we are talking about some kind of state actor doctrine vis a vis misinformation censorship under previous ownership. I do not think there are any violations of intellectual property law given that there is surely a waiver of ownership of posts in the TOS. I, of course, do not have the kind of free time required to do something like engage with Twitter, and accordingly I have no account, cannot post, and have not agreed to the TOS. I think you have misconstrued my post, but that’s ok.
parker_mountain 3y ago
>You're free to delete your content and your account if you're unhappy. >Senior Director of Monetization at Reddit You of all people should know that "free to" and "should" and consent by default is perfectly legal. And yet, it's also gross and slimy. So I guess I'm not at all surprised to find out you're a monetization person. Gross.
- jamiequint 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
rambojohnson 3y ago
the ethical implications of using someone's data without explicit, informed consent for each specific use case is obviously problematic. the data landscape is ever-evolving, and what was acceptable or even conceivable years ago may not be the same today. companies should not only be transparent but also dynamically update users on how their data is being used and offer an option to opt-out. ignoring this not only impacts individual users but also has broader societal implications. consent fatigue is real; expecting users to keep track and delete their accounts across numerous platforms is neither practical nor ethical. also, cancelling your account or laboriously deleting all of your content doesn't necessarily guarantee that all your data will be deleted on the backend... did you think your comment through at all?
marricks 3y ago
Comments like this act like the consumer has all the power to choose and create the world they want. We don't, companies own this world and major public forums and make decisions together like this which we are powerless to change. Corporations have more power in our government than individuals. They have a better understanding and coordination. Acting like a public forum owned by a company is immune from criticism because it's a private company is sweeping so much under the rug. I imagine you wouldn't be where you are in life if you didn't believe such things, though.
ulkesh 3y ago
I did. Right after Musk took over. Doesn’t mean I can’t also have an opinion on the matter.

ianferrel 3y ago

Given how many "deleted" posts recently resurfaced, you are in fact not free to delete your content, because it won't be deleted, just hidden.

jamiequint 3y ago
Go through the GDPR deletion process if you care that much, will very likely be deleted because the fines are massive (4% of annual worldwide turnover)
- squarefoot 3y ago
  I'm not sure the GDPR can be enforced outside of the EU, therefore one can't be absolutely certain the posts will not appear if accessed from elsewhere.
  - fzeindl 3y ago
    It is enforced internationally just like copyright law. It is a law for EU users no matter where their data resides. Meta was fined 1.3 billion dollars in spring for GDPR violation.
    - Alupis 3y ago
      Being fined != paying a fine. Realistically, a company is only obligated to pay the fine if they have a physical presence within the EU, and care to keep that presence. For some companies, the calculus says pay the fines and cooperate with EU laws. But for most companies, they can and do safely ignore GDPR and other EU laws. EU laws do not apply outside the EU... despite what many Europeans want to believe.
      - fzeindl 3y ago
        That is your opinion. We will see what the courts say to Meta and Amazon.
      - lnxg33k1 3y ago
        But for most companies, they can and do safely ignore GDPR and other EU laws. EU laws do not apply outside the EU... despite what many Europeans want to believe. You’re right but when did you meet Europeans who said that a company selling in India has to respect GDPR? You only need to apply EU regulations if you serve EU citizens, or you get either fined or blocked
- ianferrel 3y ago
  I am not an EU citizen or resident, so I don't believe that avenue is open to me. Also, Twitter has not of late demonstrated significant susceptibility to regulations. I will note that we've narrowed the claim from "you're free to delete your content" to "If you live in some countries you're very likely to be able to delete your content", which I agree is probably true.
  - Ylpertnodi 3y ago
    >I am not an EU citizen or resident, Resident is enough.
    - Alupis 3y ago
      In a very real, practical sense, GDPR can be safely ignored for most non-EU companies. Europeans seem to believe things like GDPR apply to the entire world. They don't. If your company has no physical presence within the EU - ignore EU laws as much as you want. There is nothing they can do about it.
- dhoe 3y ago
  You would think so! I've requested deletion under GDPR and here's what you get in response: Thank you for your inquiry. You can deactivate your account at any time. When deactivated, your Twitter account, including your display name, username, and public profile, will no longer be viewable on Twitter.com, Twitter for iOS, and Twitter for Android. For up to 30 days after deactivation, it is still possible to restore your Twitter account if it was accidentally or wrongfully deactivated. Keep in mind that search engines and other third parties may still retain copies of your public information, like your profile information and public Tweets, even after you have deleted the information from our services or deactivated your account.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  GDPR means absolutely nothing between an American customer and an American company. It's completely irrelevant. And I'm not even sure it means anything even for users in the EU. If Twitter doesn't have any offices/subsidiaries/bank accounts in the EU, then even if the EU fined them, I'm not sure how that would ever be enforced?
  - jedberg 3y ago
    Twitter has an office in Ireland and is most definitely regulated under GDPR.
    - crazygringo 3y ago
      Is it still there? I knew they did previously, but last year there were reports it was possibly closing as part of Musk's layoffs. Looking online I can't find any recent information. Basically, given the way Musk has been ignoring other regulations and/or not paying for things, I'm wondering if he even cares about GDPR. And if he doesn't care and shuts down any legal European presence, then does it matter? (Of course if the Ireland office is still active and receiving lots of European advertiser revenue, then of course the GDPR has teeth.)
      - jedberg 3y ago
        My friend works there, it's definitely still there.
        Alupis 3y ago
        Perhaps not for long... Shutting that office down and safely ignoring the GDPR is probably a valid concession for a US-based business built around data collection. It's not like EU users will stop or be blocked from using X anyway.
        crazygringo 3y ago
        Thanks! OK, GDPR should still have teeth then. Good to know.
- Raed667 3y ago
  They don't have a form to request the information to be deleted under GDPR. I have looked everywhere under help.twitter.com and they just ask you to disable your account.
jiofj 3y ago
[flagged]
- nitwit005 3y ago
  Type "twitter deleted posts reappearing" into Google, and browse the dozens of news articles.
  - jiofj 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - nitwit005 3y ago
      If you've used Twitter in the last six months or so, you'll have seen serious and obvious bugs. Large numbers of people report seeing a bug. Having them all be liars seems rather unlikely.
      - jiofj 3y ago
        Seeing bugs is one thing (I stopped using twitter like 5 years ago or so and it was always a bug fest so I can believe it got even worse) but we are talking about a single specific bug here with important privacy consequences. Some reliable proof would be nice.

GoofballJones 3y ago

[flagged]

nivekney 3y ago
> The mentality of actively opposing or criticizing anyone who defends a particular individual, organization, or viewpoint can be described as "tribalism"
- Eisenstein 3y ago
  Tribalism is loyalty to an ingroup, not opposition of "a particular individual, organization, or viewpoint".
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dang 3y ago
It's against HN's rules to post like this - please see https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Also, could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing the guidelines and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

fluidcruft 3y ago

Twitter: the public square that owns your speech.

mattdeboard 3y ago

> There's nothing it "should" be, it's not your company Well for a lot of us humans, ownership is not a stopper for conversations about ethics in technology.

jamiequint 3y ago
The ethics argument is asinine. If you don’t like the rules, don’t use the product or start your own company. Just don’t be an insufferable whiner about it.
- mattdeboard 3y ago
  > asinine > insufferable whiner I don't think this is a proportionate response to a convo about ethics in tech.
  - jamiequint 3y ago
    If you pull the “we need to have an ethics discussion” card about public data posted on a website you can quit anytime, you’re an insufferable whiner. Sorry not sorry.
    - mattdeboard 3y ago
      Have a nice day.
- singleshot_ 3y ago
  I think you may have meant “not asinine” or perhaps “I have a terrible attitude and should skip it.” The ethical discussion is kind of the entire point. We all know what the law is.

iuhaegpoinqhpoq 3y ago

If someone created an account back when AI was not a thing, they did NOT consent to their data being used for AI: You cannot expect people to retroactively consent to a thing the existence of which they were not even aware of when they gave consent for some limited OTHER use. Besides, it's just rude to do things for which there was no consent in general, no matter whether it is AI or anything else. No consent is no consent. Further, you can't expect people who have a life in general to sit around all day just waiting to figure out where they have to delete accounts before they are misused. Bazillions of websites nowadays want you to create an account, the normal behavior is that users just abandon accounts which they don't need anymore. Nobody has the time to delete all of them. Your profile says you were "Senior Director of Monetization at Reddit". Considering all the outrage that company has caused with its users as well (redesign cough cough - just one example out of a truckload), and that the outrage-causing things largely seemed to be aimed at monetization, perhaps you should do some soul seeking to figure out whether your values are aligned with common societal morals. Or in other words: How many more people will you make angry until you realize that maybe you're the baddie?

lsmeducation 3y ago
You most likely consented to future changes to the ToS. It's kind of like their version of asking a Genie for infinite wishes as one of their three wishes.
- iuhaegpoinqhpoq 3y ago
  So they can just change the ToS to say "Your full bank account balance belongs to Twitter after YYYY-MM-DD" ?
  - benterix 3y ago
    Basically, they can ask anything that is not forbidden by the law. If you disagree, you can try to get them to court.
    - 3y ago

libraryatnight 3y ago

Something tells me Elon could announce he's going to shit on all your faces and you'd be like "it's his company he can do it!" While opening your mouth and looking up with a smile.

check89 3y ago
[flagged]
parl_match 3y ago
It's been entertaining watching the pro-Elon crowd shrink and get quieter as he repeatedly screws up. I'm not saying every decision he's made has been bad (some, like revenue sharing and using Twitter Blue, are good imo). But he really has been screwing up bad, and in ways that are indefensible by anyone with common sense.
- check89 3y ago
  > the pro-Elon crowd shrink and get quieter Source? > he really has been screwing up bad, and in ways that are indefensible by anyone with common sense. Examples?
dang 3y ago
Could you please stop posting unsubstantive comments and flamebait? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful. You may not owe $CelebrityBillionaire better but you owe this community better if you're participating in it.

brokencode 3y ago

I don’t know how people can be so absolutely shocked that their public posts online could be used by anybody for basically any purpose. If you want to keep your thoughts private, then maybe don’t post them publicly? If WhatsApp or another private messaging app started doing this, I’d be right there with the people calling that absolutely unacceptable. But I’m not surprised at all that Twitter is doing this, and I don’t know how anybody even remotely tech savvy could be.

singleshot_ 3y ago
If only there was some legal regime that turned this conundrum into a scenario whereby people could publicly share their intellectual property while still retaining control of their rights in the material. This seems so critical to a functioning society that one would have thought it would have been considered in the Constitution. Oh well!
- brokencode 3y ago
  If you think Twitter is violating the constitution or copyright law, then take them to court. But by agreeing to the terms of use, Twitter retains certain rights over what you post on the platform. If that is not acceptable, then don’t use Twitter. If you think your thoughts are too valuable for Twitter to use, then write them into a book or blog or some other venue where your intellectual property can be protected.
  - singleshot_ 3y ago
    I do not think Twitter is violating the Constitution unless we are talking about some kind of state actor doctrine vis a vis misinformation censorship under previous ownership. I do not think there are any violations of intellectual property law given that there is surely a waiver of ownership of posts in the TOS. I, of course, do not have the kind of free time required to do something like engage with Twitter, and accordingly I have no account, cannot post, and have not agreed to the TOS. I think you have misconstrued my post, but that’s ok.

parker_mountain 3y ago

>You're free to delete your content and your account if you're unhappy. >Senior Director of Monetization at Reddit You of all people should know that "free to" and "should" and consent by default is perfectly legal. And yet, it's also gross and slimy. So I guess I'm not at all surprised to find out you're a monetization person. Gross.

jamiequint 3y ago
[flagged]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

rambojohnson 3y ago

the ethical implications of using someone's data without explicit, informed consent for each specific use case is obviously problematic. the data landscape is ever-evolving, and what was acceptable or even conceivable years ago may not be the same today. companies should not only be transparent but also dynamically update users on how their data is being used and offer an option to opt-out. ignoring this not only impacts individual users but also has broader societal implications. consent fatigue is real; expecting users to keep track and delete their accounts across numerous platforms is neither practical nor ethical. also, cancelling your account or laboriously deleting all of your content doesn't necessarily guarantee that all your data will be deleted on the backend... did you think your comment through at all?

marricks 3y ago

Comments like this act like the consumer has all the power to choose and create the world they want. We don't, companies own this world and major public forums and make decisions together like this which we are powerless to change. Corporations have more power in our government than individuals. They have a better understanding and coordination. Acting like a public forum owned by a company is immune from criticism because it's a private company is sweeping so much under the rug. I imagine you wouldn't be where you are in life if you didn't believe such things, though.

ulkesh 3y ago

I did. Right after Musk took over. Doesn’t mean I can’t also have an opinion on the matter.