RonanTheGrey

26 ms·

91.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> The newspapers who got moderated by Twitter and are now crying foul are the same ones who are the reason Twitter started with their heavy-handed proactive approach to moderation in the first place. Yeah, I was interested in their analy
92.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
I thought about this, and this seems an odd claim to me: Twitter has, and has had for some time, the capability to tag tweets with "this is possibly a bot" or "this is possibly misinformation". As much as I disagree with
93.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
As with everything, intent matters, but in spirit I agree with you. As much as I despise what Twitter did, I've been thinking about it for a couple of days and feel that the best option is a large number of strong Twitter competitors,
94.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24818637 Seems relevant to that response. NONE of the news agencies are good faith actors anymore. It's all infotainment to the last atom. I mean, that's itself the subject of
95.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Who is talking about political immunity? I want to hear what my officials are saying! You would deny me that right. Who is the authoritarian here?
96.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Hey, when everyone is hanging out over at whitehouse.gov, let me know. Until then your argument is beside the point.
97.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Twitter has already, on several occasions, been forced by the courts on "public square" grounds to take actions Twitter didn't want to for political reasons. You're looking at the leaf on the tree and assuring everyone y
98.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Then you probably want to know that your public servants are doing that, don't you? Rather than not know at all? Authoritarian would be you're not allowed to know at all. I'm pretty sure we tried that sometime in history, oh
99.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
"Can be" and therefore "must be because I say so" are two entirely different things. It's still an option to just leave it alone. What is this obsession our culture recently has that says "Just because I CAN do
100.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Incorrect. If you are standing on the street, everyone will hear you whether they want to or not (though they may ignore you), unless they are deaf.
101.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
You know that's not the first time that idea has occurred to me either and I have this worrying nagging in the back of my head that that is literally exactly the long game they're playing.
102.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Yeah, I think the "what could go wrong" line was more hyperbolic than anything else. It's been happening for a long time now.
103.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
In the physical world, the analog here is "you are standing on a box in front of the courthouse, shouting today's particular theory on some regressive tax, and nobody is listening (but nobody is pulling you down and shoving a sock
104.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
It's really kind of mind boggling really. Does the Times not think they will ever fall afoul of the goodthink, and this weapon will never be used against them?
105.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
You know perfectly well that that's not a satisfying argument to what I said. Try again. And, you're wrong by the way. Courts have already ruled more than once that it is, which is why Trump's account still exists.
106.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Ah, fair enough. 100% agreed!
107.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> Remove this content and they are punished by the right removing section 230 protections. Allow it and the left calls them destructive monopolies and breaks them apart. This seems to suggest a larger solution -- that these platforms do
108.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Ok. Where's the internet public square? Please show me the way because I think I forgot my map.
109.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> It's up to the people to manage their own thoughts, same as it ever was. So let them read what you don't want them to. If it isn't illegal or incitement of violence, it doesn't need to be removed.
110.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> The more I reflect on things the more I think social networks are just a thing that shouldn't exist. I keep ending up there too honestly. We'll always build something "like" socializing online. Humans don't sto
111.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
When the internet has a publicly owned space that no private entity controls, you get to make that argument. Until then, platforms like Twitter are the next best thing we have to a public square (and in fact really the ONLY online public sq
112.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> are quickly influenced by a lot of stupid theories because they are pretty bad at distinguishing bad ones from good ones; Actually this is an interesting problem to think about; what, then, did these people believe before they could
113.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> But forcing a private institution to adopt a specific editorial stance, THAT'S anti-freedom Who is forcing a private organization to adopt any stance? "Leaving alone" is not the same as "actively promoting." Tw
114.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
> I'm also curious on another aspect, as I don't believe "right to free speech" is meant in any way to imply a lack of liability for damages caused by that speech. It depends what you meant. The law doesn't give
115.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Yes.
116.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
I don't know why this got downvoted, I use 365 (in addition to other non-Google providers) and am quite happy with them for the accounts I use them for.
117.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Several years ago Microsoft (rightly) saw the writing on the wall that the way they were going to compete was to be the open solution to everyone else's walled garden. It has been a strategy that has worked out fantastically well for t
118.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Start sooner rather than later. It's extremely hard to get off of them once you're tied to their services. I'm basically down to email and some old Google Drives I need to clean out. Found a project in this thread that should
119.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
What we're seeing is the inevitable consequence of the granting and concentration of power. An idea I've seen proved true more times than I'd like to count is that "if you don't want power abused, don't create
120.
by RonanTheGrey 6y ago
Which hopefully would spell the end of Twitter, in a shocking positive twist for human civilization.

More ›