concinds

29 ms·

481.
by concinds 4y ago
I was using uBlock Origin with a bunch of filters, could be it. Thankfully geohot removed the loginwall from Twitter, so I could just use that.
482.
by concinds 4y ago
Though the problem with these national instances may be distinct, the main Nitter.net instance hasn't been working since October 25th apparently. This same issue (no tweets show up) remains today; I've experienced this bug for the
483.
by concinds 4y ago
For context: AirDrop was one of the only ways protesters had to communicate en-masse. Signal is unsafe for Chinese protesters, since it requires SMS verification upon signup and is therefore linked to your identity.[0] Mesh networks are the
484.
by concinds 4y ago
See this article from November 10th, from the China Digital Times, a news website which is considered trustworthy. https://chinadigitaltimes.net/2022/11/netizen-voices-apple-r...
485.
by concinds 4y ago
On that, I agree.
486.
by concinds 4y ago
I saw that. I'm saying that while this bot farm may be new, this was a longstanding problem for years, even under the "fully-staffed" Twitter. And clearly, not all of this problem can be attributed to bots, since I saw this o
487.
by concinds 4y ago
> Apple has also threatened to withhold Twitter from its App Store, but won’t tell us why https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1597300125243944961
488.
by concinds 4y ago
> This is only happening because Elon fired the moderation team that used to guard against such propaganda. Citation needed. I turned on "Show sensitive media" in my Twitter settings years ago, since many political posts were i
489.
Apple asked video app to censor Covid search terms, Pepe the Frog thumbnails(twitter.com)
91 points by concinds 4y ago|30 comments
490.
by concinds 4y ago
Posting it here since it's directly relevant to App Review and other things this community cares about (and perhaps has experience with).
491.
Musk: “Who else has Apple censored?”(twitter.com)
7 points by concinds 4y ago|7 comments
492.
by concinds 4y ago
There's a big difference between NSFW/NSFL warnings, and trigger warnings. The former are meant for people that either actively avoid watching gore/porn, or who generally wouldn't mind but are in public/at work and
493.
by concinds 4y ago
The 'bullshit' was mostly not spread by scientists, but by media. When the findings of scientific studies are twisted and manipulated, and when a study that shows X is treated as if it proved X, and Y, and Z, there's no bet
494.
by concinds 4y ago
> why the changes at Twitter might in the end be rather less stark than some people anticipate IMO, reading between the lines a little, the deeper message is a criticism of Musk's decision to make moderation decisions before he crea
495.
by concinds 4y ago
Yoel Roth publicly stood by Musk after the takeover, but resigned shortly after. He was in this November 9th Twitter Space with Musk: https://twitter.com/robinw/status/1590403084513333249 And though you might expe
496.
I Was the Head of Trust and Safety at Twitter. This Is What Could Become of It(nytimes.com)
24 points by concinds 4y ago|4 comments
497.
by concinds 4y ago
The tone is necessary. So much bullshit 'nutrition science', with defective methodologies, has been promoted by mainstream media (along with exaggerated nonsense on the "risks" of eggs, coffee, tea, spinach...) that it&#
498.
by concinds 4y ago
I'm pro-crypto. This is just a repeat of Mt Gox from 2014. Same scam. Gamblers and get-rich-quick idiots get wiped, as they should. Those people don't want regulation; they see that as an obstacle to becoming billionaires. In a fe
499.
by concinds 4y ago
Forensic experts are a good information source on this: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.12506.pdf (Windows 10) "Required diagnostics" seem reasonable: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows
500.
by concinds 4y ago
I agree. Other commenters seem to think the NYT actually does proper tech investigative journalism, which is completely untrue beyond sensationalistic coverage, surface-level coverage of antitrust critiques, an obsession with social media
501.
by concinds 4y ago
> Constant software upgrades to maintain high standard of security https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2022/t... "Zatko’s complaint alleges he had warned colleagues that half the com
502.
by concinds 4y ago
I think that has far more to do with this site being relatively low-traffic. Double the traffic, while keeping the exact same rules and topic, and it would become unreadable. It's easy to "moderate" when people clearly break
503.
by concinds 4y ago
Musk doesn't own Twitter, advertisers do, and they will, until Twitter somehow finds alternative revenue sources. All the nonsense people post about "democratic oversight of Twitter", or "independent" policy enforce
504.
by concinds 4y ago
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/a/2013/filtering-mentions
505.
by concinds 4y ago
Since you're disputing my comment and not the parent, I take it you agree that making people pay for verification is somehow "anti free speech", while promoting verified users when it was an opaque process was not? The commen
506.
by concinds 4y ago
> respond freely You can already filter out non-verified mentions and replies. Presumably that's not going away, and will be used by far more people after this change. It very much is a barrier to entry.
507.
by concinds 4y ago
Verified users are already boosted in replies and search. That's been the case for many years. The only change is that since verification will require payment, boosting will require that same payment. It's a complete non-story.
508.
by concinds 4y ago
Not a bad idea. Make existing bluechecks pay to stay verified, and you make it cringe -> no one wants to pay. But if you verify everyone who has Twitter Blue, then existing bluechecks won't want to be left out, and will pay up.
509.
by concinds 4y ago
Those aren't ideal comparisons; Meta's embroiled in its own problems, and Snapchat is losing users. Pinterest is also widely-hated and practically dead. Twitter was unprofitable, but people generally accept that for companies with
510.
by concinds 4y ago
With how unsuccessful Apple News+ has been, it's frankly unsurprising and would likely have happened whether or not Musk owns Twitter. It's obviously not why people subscribe to Twitter Blue, why increase costs for no reason?

More ›