RIP Twitter

[SamRebel35]

And there it is. So predictable. Some of you guys will say anything to defend this guy but the truth is, he's just looking out for his $. He manipulated you. Fear mongering often works, but thankfully the suggested AI pause largely fell on deaf ears

Elon Musk plans artificial intelligence start-up to rival OpenAI

YGHN!

 

[n_huffhines]

Pretty ironic. Using the same policy that was violated by the NY Post, except this time the policy had been recently amended to allow journalists to report on hacked materials.

Journalist Banned From Twitter After Reporting on Hack of Matt Walsh’s Account

 

[RikidyBones]

Pretty ironic. Using the same policy that was violated by the NY Post, except this time the policy had been recently amended to allow journalists to report on hacked materials.

Journalist Banned From Twitter After Reporting on Hack of Matt Walsh’s Account

Nypost wasn't hacked material. It was material abandoned. Matt Walsh was clearly hacked. Thought we established this already?

 

[n_huffhines]

Nypost wasn't hacked material. It was material abandoned. Matt Walsh was clearly hacked. Thought we established this already?

1) You know that hacking isn't just breaching somebody's cyber-security to tap into the main frame, like in the movies. There are all manner of methods of hacking. They call it social engineering. Like tricking people into giving you their passwords. Or like tricking people into thinking a laptop with incriminating info was abandoned. How does Twitter know it was abandoned?

2) We still don't know if the laptop contained hacked materials (and we will never know this for sure because time stamps can be doctored and somebody else can send emails from the source with cryptographic signatures), so to say Twitter was wrong for enforcing their policy is pretty debatable. It always goes back to the FBI and their shenanigans. If they're telling Twitter it was a hack and all that, of course they're going to enforce their policy.

Really, the point is that Twitter suppressed speech in both instances, and of course you think one is substantially different from the other.

 

[RikidyBones]

1) You know that hacking isn't just breaching somebody's cyber-security to tap into the main frame, like in the movies. There are all manner of methods of hacking. They call it social engineering. Like tricking people into giving you their passwords. Or like tricking people into thinking a laptop with incriminating info was abandoned. How does Twitter know it was abandoned?

2) We still don't know if the laptop contained hack materials, so to say Twitter was wrong for enforcing their policy is pretty debatable. It always goes back to the FBI and their shenanigans. If they're telling Twitter it was a hack and all that, of course they're going to enforce their policy.

1. No ****. Twitter didn't know if it was or wasn't. They KNEW Matt Walsh was hacked. It was admitted on the platform. NYP story stated how the information was received. Twitter should have looked into it to confirm.
2. The FBI suck.

 

[n_huffhines]

1. No ****. Twitter didn't know if it was or wasn't. They KNEW Matt Walsh was hacked. It was admitted on the platform. NYP story stated how the information was received. Twitter should have looked into it to confirm.
2. The FBI suck.

This is where you guys **** up. You have no ability to see this from Twitter's perspective. If the FBI tells you it's hacked materials, why would you spend your own money and time to confirm it when that's probably not even possible? Be realistic about what you expect from a social media company.

Matt Walsh was hacked, but the hacker did not share the material on Twitter. A journo reported on it, which is now supposed to be allowed, and he got perma-banned. Not suspended.

Twitter can do whatever they want in either instance. I'm only here to point to the inconsistencies about when we think it's OK to suppress speech and when it's not.

 

[RikidyBones]

This is where you guys **** up. You have no ability to see this from Twitter's perspective. If the FBI tells you it's hacked materials, why would you spend your own money and time to confirm it when that's probably not even possible? Be realistic about what you expect from a social media company.

Matt Walsh was hacked, but the hacker did not share the material on Twitter. A journo reported on it, which is now supposed to be allowed, and he got perma-banned. Not suspended.

Twitter can do whatever they want in either instance. I'm only here to point to the inconsistencies about when we think it's OK to suppress speech and when it's not.

The "journalist" asked for materials on the platform. That's what got him shut down.

 

[n_huffhines]

The "journalist" asked for materials on the platform. That's what got him shut down.

As far as I know, the rule is there to shut down the posting of hacked materials. I do not believe that there is a rule that says you will be banned for asking to see hacked materials. So if they had taken down a post with hacked materials in it, they would be covered by the policy, but that's not what happened. Twitter's policy from the article I posted:

“We recognize that source materials obtained through leaks can serve as the basis for important reporting by news agencies meant to hold our institutions and leaders to account,” the platform’s policy states. “As such, we defer to their editorial judgement in publishing these materials, and believe our responsibility is to provide additional context that is useful in providing clarity to the conversation that happens on Twitter.”

The policy continues: “In most cases, discussions of or reporting about hacking or hacked materials constitutes indirect distribution (unless the people or groups directly associated with a hack are responsible for the production of the discussions or reporting). In these cases, a violation of this policy would result in a label or warning message, not removal of the Tweet(s) from Twitter.”

WIRED Managing Editor Hemal Jhaveri weighed in on Wednesday night, demanding that Dell’s account be reinstated—or that Twitter at least explain itself.

“Neither Dell’s story nor his Twitter feed contained hacked materials. We do not believe his account violated Twitter’s policy,” Jhaveri wrote in a statement to Forbes. “We have not received any further explanation from Twitter and our attempts to reach Twitter’s press office were met with the customary poop emoji. We ask that the account be reinstated, and that Twitter provide an explanation.”

 

[RikidyBones]

As far as I know, the rule is there to shut down the posting of hacked materials. I do not believe that there is a rule that says you will be banned for asking to see hacked materials. So if they had taken down a post with hacked materials in it, they would be covered by the policy, but that's not what happened. Twitter's policy from the article I posted:

“We recognize that source materials obtained through leaks can serve as the basis for important reporting by news agencies meant to hold our institutions and leaders to account,” the platform’s policy states. “As such, we defer to their editorial judgement in publishing these materials, and believe our responsibility is to provide additional context that is useful in providing clarity to the conversation that happens on Twitter.”

The policy continues: “In most cases, discussions of or reporting about hacking or hacked materials constitutes indirect distribution (unless the people or groups directly associated with a hack are responsible for the production of the discussions or reporting). In these cases, a violation of this policy would result in a label or warning message, not removal of the Tweet(s) from Twitter.”

WIRED Managing Editor Hemal Jhaveri weighed in on Wednesday night, demanding that Dell’s account be reinstated—or that Twitter at least explain itself.

“Neither Dell’s story nor his Twitter feed contained hacked materials. We do not believe his account violated Twitter’s policy,” Jhaveri wrote in a statement to Forbes. “We have not received any further explanation from Twitter and our attempts to reach Twitter’s press office were met with the customary poop emoji. We ask that the account be reinstated, and that Twitter provide an explanation.”

Lol the poop emoji. I've seen that it is a part of the policy. He also did post hacked material with a picture of the screen of texts coming in.

 

[n_huffhines]

Lol the poop emoji. I've seen that it is a part of the policy. He also did post hacked material with a picture of the screen of texts coming in.

You got a link to that part of the policy?

I'm trying to see it from the other side. I literally googled "Dell Cameron Fox News" and nothing came up. I thought it might be Google BS so I went to their site and they are not covering the story at all. Does that tell us something?

And last night when this Forbes writer was trying to check Twitter's hacked material page, it was mysteriously down and this morning he can't tell if any changes have been made to the policy.



Wired Journalist Banned From Twitter For Reporting On Hack Of Anti-Trans Activist Matt Walsh

 

[NashVol11]

Elon is a clown lol

 

[SamRebel35]

Elon derangement syndrome.

"I don't even care about twitter anymore! I'm on mastadon anyway!"

Ten seconds later...

"Elon is a clown because ______! Hahaha what a idiot!"

 

[NashVol11]

Elon derangement syndrome.

"I don't even care about twitter anymore! I'm on mastadon anyway!"

Ten seconds later...

"Elon is a clown because ______! Hahaha what a idiot!"

Are you just being a passive aggressive baby or did you mean to quote me? Can you point me to me saying I left Twitter or explain why the above is not clown behavior?

I didn’t think so, go hero worship somewhere else thx

 

[ButchPlz]

Elon derangement syndrome.

"I don't even care about twitter anymore! I'm on mastadon anyway!"

Ten seconds later...

"Elon is a clown because ______! Hahaha what a idiot!"

These doofuses sure are spending a lot of time talking about a dead and gone social media platform.

 

[Orangeburst]

House Democrat Threatens Twitter Files Journalist with Prosecution and Imprisonment

Dems are enemies of freedom and transparency

 

[SamRebel35]

Are you just being a passive aggressive baby or did you mean to quote me? Can you point me to me saying I left Twitter or explain why the above is not clown behavior?

I didn’t think so, go hero worship somewhere else thx

You and Huff are currently together at a vegan frozen yogurt place talking about Elon, aren't you?

 

[SamRebel35]

OMG! Buzzfeed is leaving Twitter! Mostly because Buzzfeed is shutting down, but cause Elon too probably!

 

[NashVol11]

You and Huff are currently together at a vegan frozen yogurt place talking about Elon, aren't you?

Specifically, talking about how it must be hard for him to walk around with your head all the way up his ass. No answer to any of my questions of course, just had to defend daddy Elon even when you had nothing to say

 

[SamRebel35]

Specifically, talking about how it must be hard for him to walk around with your head all the way up his ass. No answer to any of my questions of course, just had to defend daddy Elon even when you had nothing to say

Not defending him, just highlighting some people's obsession with him. I have recently stated that his Twitter takeowver has been a huge embarrassing failure. But I'm still glad he did it because I'd rather see twitter collapse than to see it as it was before.

 

[NashVol11]

Not defending him, just highlighting some people's obsession with him. I have recently stated that his Twitter move was a huge embarrassing failure. But I'm still glad he did it because I'd rather see twitter collapse than to see it as it was before.

As a user of Twitter who has never claimed to be leaving, changing the blue check from verified accounts to "these people have paid me (and/or I like them so am giving them a blue check and claiming they paid me)" is really stupid. Joe Smith from Hillwood High with 3 followers being "verified" and not the NYT because they're "69% government funded LOL I made a 69 joke" objectively is stupid.

To be honest, it's hard for me to see why anyone would get defensive or disagree with that, so if anyone is obsessed I would say it's those people

 

[SamRebel35]

As a user of Twitter who has never claimed to be leaving, changing the blue check from verified accounts to "these people have paid me (and/or I like them so am giving them a blue check and claiming they paid me)" is really stupid. Joe Smith from Hillwood High with 3 followers being "verified" and not the NYT because they're "69% government funded LOL I made a 69 joke" objectively is stupid.

To be honest, it's hard for me to see why anyone would get defensive or disagree with that, so if anyone is obsessed I would say it's those people

"Hey! Quit noticing me being obsessed with Elon! That means YOU must be obsessed with Elon! Haha! Owned!"

 

[NashVol11]

"Hey! Quit noticing me being obsessed with Elon! That means YOU must be obsessed with Elon! Haha! Owned!"

It's more the fact that you have no disagreement or response whatsoever to what I'm saying, as someone who actually uses Twitter, but feel the need to defend Daddy Elon's honor anyway. Do you have a Twitter yourself or was this all just uninformed slobbering?

 

[SamRebel35]

It's more the fact that you have no disagreement or response whatsoever to what I'm saying, as someone who actually uses Twitter, but feel the need to defend Daddy Elon's honor anyway. Do you have a Twitter yourself or was this all just uninformed slobbering?

Again, link to me defending Elon? I've actually searched ALL of my posts in this thread and can't find one where I've explicitly defended Elon. Originally, my posts were just critical of how the previous regime ran the place. Lately, all I've done is point out the people who are deranged and obsessed/ emotionally invested in his potential failure.

 

[NashVol11]

Again, link to me defending Elon? I've actually searched ALL of my posts in this thread and can't find one where I've explicitly defended Elon. Originally, my posts were just critical of how the previous regime ran the place. Lately, all I've done is point out the people who are deranged and obsessed/invested in his potential failure.

Guy 1, with a Twitter: “here’s something that is objectively stupid about Twitter right now”

Guy 2, with no Twitter, no idea what’s going on and no connection to the situation: “Hey! You didn’t have a reason to call him a clown (wrong) and you said you were leaving Twitter (wrong). Don’t say mean things about Daddy Musk, even though I can’t point out a single flaw in your point because I have no Twitter and no clue”

And I’M obsessed.

LOL

 

[SamRebel35]

Guy 1, with a Twitter: “here’s something that is objectively stupid about Twitter right now”

Guy 2, with no Twitter, no idea what’s going on and no connection to the situation: “Hey! You didn’t have a reason to call him a clown (wrong) and you said you were leaving Twitter (wrong). Don’t say mean things about Daddy Musk, even though I can’t point out a single flaw in your point because I have no Twitter and no clue”

And I’M obsessed.

LOL

You said yourself I didn't quote you. Why are you pushing back so hard on this? Is it because.... you're obsessed.... with Elon?????