News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders who break rules. Parent comment

Re:Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders wh... by weberc2 on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @07:15PM (#21265107)
Why does it matter that it’s a state compromising our democracy vs a private company? Anyway, I maintain that Twitter and other major social networks represent such an overwhelming volume of our speech that they are not simply “private companies”. To the OP’s point, their sheer power over the political process is the entire alleged Russian attack vector.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders wh... by r00fus on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @12:19AM (#21267003)
Guns and wars that’s why. Twitter doesn’t have an army and can’t dictate laws without getting its chain yanked.

Russia/China/USA etc is a whole different story.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders wh... by weberc2 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @08:22AM (#21269581)
Then you misunderstand the debate. Russia’s attack model isn’t guns and wars, it’s subverting our democracy by influencing who sees what via Twitter et al. If the Russians can change our laws by using social media to covertly influence elections, then clearly Twitter can as well. And “Twitter getting its chain yanked” depends on our ability to audit Twitter’s traffic shaping, which is nonexistent—there is no transparency.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders wh... by belltaco on Tuesday October 15, 2019 @11:16PM (#21266731)
I'd agree with you if Twitter Inc. isn't being fully transparent with its actions or manipulating things on the back end without visibility and favoring one side, like the intentions and effects of the Russian interference.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Twitter says it will restrict retweeting world leaders wh... by weberc2 on Wednesday October 16, 2019 @08:25AM (#21269597)
Cool, so we agree? Twitter’s moderation is completely opaque. All sides of this debate acknowledge this much.
[ Parent | on HN ]