News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by astrange on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @06:07PM (#12972474)
This argument doesn't work when private companies have more power in your life than the state. I'm sure you can think of a better one if you try!
Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by astrodust on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @06:50PM (#12972805)
If you think that's true you've got some serious problems.

Facebook doesn't have a militarized police force.

Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by astrange on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @07:32PM (#12973054)
It doesn't matter what I think is true. It matters what the people being banned think is true.

If you delete their account they won't learn anything or cease to exist, they'll just be angry at you somewhere else and come back later.

BTW: https://twitter.com/kthorjensen/status/798959676855455744

Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by astrodust on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @08:03PM (#12973234)
Banning people isn't for the benefit of those getting banned. It's for the other people that are tired of their bullshit. It's about controlling the tone and civility of discussions.

Communities die when they're overrun by jerks.

Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by nailer on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @08:54PM (#12973526)
You can choose the discussions you participate in, or should be able to (and yes Twitter should make this easier). And you should be able to express yourself even if people think you're a jerk.

Alternatively, others should be able to choose the discussions they wish to participate in, which may involve people you think are jerks.

Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by astrodust on Thursday November 17, 2016 @02:25AM (#12975175)
Twitter makes it easy for anyone to say anything about anyone, and it also pushes those comments to that person. This is both the amazing thing and the Achille's heel of that system.

You can block someone, but that's too late, it's retroactive. If their goal was to insult you, mission accomplished, no obstacles.

In the case of Milo he'd encourage people to go and harass others which meant you'd spend hours and hours blocking people, they'd basically DDOS your Twitter account.

Is this acceptable behaviour? Is this something to be encouraged by not punishing it?

I don't think you realize what a lightning rod some people become through no fault of their own. That you've never been struck is simply a matter of luck or not being one of the common target groups.

Remember: Not having a Twitter account doesn't mean you can't express yourself. You didn't get kicked off the internet. You're not barred from making sites or publishing your thoughts on innumerable other places.

Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by nailer on Thursday November 17, 2016 @04:09AM (#12975743)
> Twitter ... also pushes those comments to that person.

Yes. They should fix that (if these recent changes haven't yet done that). I've had one of the worst mornings of my life in the last year when I criticised a new browser API and the author of the API refused to stop mentioning me for an hour despite being asked repeatedly to stop. Having to turn off your phone because a high profile person is angry at you is awful. Having people threaten you or publish your contact details is much worse.

Who draws the line between criticising someone and 'pushing others to harass'? Would you block people on the left who have criticised people on the right who were subsequently harassed? Milo had syringes sent to his house and his mobile number published, Totalbiscuit and his wife received a bunch of death threats. We shouldn't ban all the people who criticised them because they were subsequently harassed - I'm sure you wouldn't support that and I'd be right there with you. We should ban people who actually make credible threats, publish non-Twitter contact info on Twitter as a way of harassing others, and similar behaviour.

> Not having a Twitter account doesn't mean you can't express yourself.

Yes, just that you can't express yourself on one of the few places for discussion, and more to the point, that other people who want to hear you (and in Milo's case that was a lot of people) can't do so.

> You're not barred from making sites or publishing your thoughts on innumerable other places.

But due to Metcalfe's law none of those other places have any worth.

As one of the grandparent comments says, we don't trust the free market to protect other values, we shouldn't trust it to protect freedom of expression.

Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by Torgo on Thursday November 17, 2016 @01:44PM (#12980148)
I too thought it was cool that all occupy wall street protests were de facto illegal because there was no public property to protest from anywhere even close to wall street.
Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by emp_zealoth on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @07:32PM (#12973053)
Yet it played a big role in swinging several important democratic events so far: Brexit and Trump
Re:Twitter suspends 'alt-right' accounts by astrodust on Wednesday November 16, 2016 @08:04PM (#12973237)
Newspapers like The Daily Mail also played a part. They don't have a police force either, and nobody's forced to read them.

You are, however, forced to live under whatever government gets elected.