It's mined by the same agencies that monitor everything. So your venting is deleted for yourself, but preserved eternally for the people with power over you. I rather like it.

The majority of individuals are at danger of their old tweets being brought to light years later by other people not three letter agencies. If you remove the ability for people to go back 5 years looking for dirt on someone they dislike you prevent a lot of the drama that drives twitter.

> So your venting is deleted for yourself, but preserved eternally for the people with power over you. I rather like it.

I love the phrasing. It instantly made me imagine those words being spoken by Lord Demiurge [0] (as voiced by Jeff Johnson [1]).

[0] https://overlordmaruyama.fandom.com/wiki/Demiurge

[1] https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/tv-shows/Overlord/Demiu....

Thanks! I was going to say 'preserved forever for' but the double-'for' was awkward. Phrasing credit goes to fantasy author David Eddings, attitude to a C.S. Friedman character, Tarrant. Lord Demiurge has some interesting similarities!

Searches show interesting Gnostic ideas about Demiurge being a lion-faced-serpent. How appropriate. I have trouble finding a sample of Jeff Johnson as Demiurge, though.

The specific clip I had in mind can be found in "Overlord" (English dub), season 3, episode 9, 20m25s - 20m50s ([0] and [1]).

[0] https://www.hulu.com/watch/1657b4d2-49dd-450d-9a0f-aa2e1d45d... (requires subscription or free trial)

[1] https://www.funimation.com/shows/overlord/war-of-words/uncut... (requires subscription)

Found it! Perfect :D

Doesn't the fact that Twitter posts (mostly) stay incentivize conscientiousness, precisely because it doesn't take away the reality that words have consequences? It's still not an excellent representation of how forgiveness and personal development exists in the real world (i.e. we can forget about the details of what's been done in the past, but what we post stays in some database), but without the longevity of Twitter/FB posts, people just wouldn't think twice about what they're saying and this is a time when we do need more critical thinking.

> without the longevity of Twitter/FB posts, people just wouldn't think twice about what they're saying

You clearly have not yet witnessed the bad parts of Facebook and Twitter. I've seen people calling for genocide on Facebook under their real name and that's not even remotely the worst.

Facebook's content moderation teams are basically getting PTSD[0] by default as they enforce rules that specify under what circumstances photos of things like animal abuse or decapitation are acceptable(!).

The assumption that people behave normally on the internet when they're not anonymous is provably false. You might think that intuitively, but that's because you're a decent person.

[0] https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/facebook-content-moderators-...

I mean, I didn’t sleep through 2016 onwards but people threatening violence still get banned, people with bigoted views still get called out or damage their real-world offline relationships, and it’s possible that there’d be even less people who’d be mindful of what they say without those feedback mechanisms.

Many of those people facing real-life consequences don't identify themselves, though. I agree that it helps to some extent, but that kind of individual often doesn't care about a possible backlash or just avoids platforms without anonymity in the first place.

The only real solution I see is to keep such online platforms small or segmented enough that they can be effectively moderated. Troublemakers will not go away no matter what rules are in place; but if those rules are properly enforced they can be kicked out before causing too much damage.

Why does Facebook need to moderate the populations talking points?

The us government literally drops bombs on people's homes.

Humanity is full of all kinds of bullshit. I wish people would stop trying to make everything online a fucking safe space.

It's not about making everything a safe space, it's making sure kids on social media don't get sent gory pictures, radical extremists aren't able to incite violence on a massive scale, shooters don't get to livestream their mass murders and school kids don't commit suicide due to cyber bullying.

This issue isn't black or white and your edgy worldview doesn't improve the situation. Just so you know, even 4chan is heavily moderated and so are many other places the average person would usually avoid.

Freedom of speech isn't an edgy world view.

>Why does Facebook need to moderate the populations talking points?

Why do you think?

>The us government literally drops bombs on people's homes.

Ok.

>Humanity is full of all kinds of bullshit. I wish people would stop trying to make everything online a fucking safe space.

Waheoo, I know you deliberately caught the coronavirus to spread it as part of your Jihad. I shared your address on my Facebook wall. I'm sure you don't mind; you don't need a fucking safe space.

You're welcome to do whatever you like, don't complain to me when you end up in jail.

I'm not claiming laws are bad, I'm claiming Facebook isn't the fucking police.

Why would I end up in jail? Freedom of speech.

My mentally ill brother-in-law and his militia may go to jail, but by then it will be way too late for you.

Does it really seem to you that Twitter incentivizes conscientiousness?

Is that your only experience with Twitter? Twitter fills about a million more roles than venting. I don’t see any “cesspool” on my feed in fact.

My direct experience with Twitter is I have one dude's account bookmarked and I check it almost daily because he's a great source of local news. I have a profile but I haven't logged in or used it for a long time. My experience is fine.

There sure seem to be a lot of people, though, who have the cesspool experience I mentioned. It's great that you and I don't have this experience with Twitter. It's also anecdotal and not really relevant to my comment which was about people who aren't you and me.

I really think that people need to have an AI shield or body guard that monitors and controls ones access to media, to protect them from harmful concepts and behaviors. This might sound fantastical, and I understand the vastness of implications, but it will be viewed as no different than wearing sunglasses or mittens. We wear clothing and protect ourselves from the environment, the mental environment out there is unlike anything humans have ever come across.

At some point, the weatherman will tell us about rates of state sponsored AI powered psyops campaigns across social media sites for the day.

I forsee some problems with people being able to literally lock themselves in different realities in real life depending on their personal views

We have that already, and we also have people that don't participate because it is too dangerous psychologically.

At the lowest level, I am talking about even being able to watch a movie on Netflix and not be exposed to the most grotesque violence. Just black out the 36 frames of someone taking a hook through the eye. Or doing sentiment analysis on a thread and recommending that you not partake.

My experience is that there's a ton of value there, but the trending tab is like a siren call I can't resist even though I regret it almost every time. Usually I can't imagine why something is trending, click on it and lose ever more faith in humanity.

> I don’t see any “cesspool” on my feed in fact.

You should file a bug report. Your feed should make you equal parts angry, sad, and horny.

It's a personalized echo chamber. YMMV

Following stuff that interests you is not an echo chamber.

A machine learning algorithm then uses that stuff to recommend content which is similar. If one engages with opinionated stuff, then they'll only get recommended stuff that conforms to their original opinion, forming an echo chamber.

Imagine following some people who talk about houseplants. Maybe you like some tweets with the kind of information you consider of above-average usefulness for you. Maybe you praise someone for a beautiful pic of their monstera variegata.

The algorithm decides to show you more high-quality tweets and prettier photos.

If you consider that an echo chamber then all right, but I don't think it's a useful definition. Is going to a scifi-focused bookshop an echo chamber?

Maybe it’s because houseplants aren’t a controversial topic. Take any topic where people hold strong opinions (politics, religion, ...) and start following people you agree with. I guarantee you’ll have to very deliberately look for people on the other end of the spectrum at some point because your feed and your follow recommendations will indeed be an echo chamber.

I agree, that's exactly my point — online communities might be (for sure often are) an echo chamber, but that depends on what content you subscribe to. Specifically on how opinionated-ness-y and on-topic that content is.

If it only were that well. In reality, when I follow people who posts on various niche subjects, it turns out the algorithm believes I'm mostly interested in American Politics because quite a few of those posters are into that and that overshadows all the niche subjects.

Looking at the list of things Twitter believes I'm interested in is quite enlightening about the limits of recommendation engines.

I think the proper analogy is a bookstore whose titles rearrange themselves on the shelves based on your liminal reactions to the covers.

You need to change the viewing setting to "latest first"

And, as far as I can understand, it will disengage itself from "latest first" as soon as it detects you are not addicted enough to not miss every new update with it engaged, thus having zero echo-cancelling powers.

It did that for a while, but in the last months it stopped doing that. I'm not even using it very frequently but it remains at "sort by date"

> This is great. It fills the same role as Twitter, but people's posts disappear after a few seconds, making it better than Twitter.

Also like Jodel it is anonymous[1], which is a good thing whenever possible as has become obvious lately.

[1]: wrt other users. Random nutjobs of all shapes cannot easily find you and nobody can verify if Jodel have really banned someone so they can to a larger degree do what they think is correct instead of what the mob demands. Threaten someone however and police will have your adress shortly, - Jodel is not an alternative to Signal or Matrix.

Somehow similar to HN isn’t it?

Was gonna say that's what I use HN for, I got disenfranchised with the industry and everyone in it a few years ago, now I just troll and call it how it is. If I don't get downvotes I something is wrong.

Pedant's note: ITYM 'disenchanted'. To be disenfranchised is to be rendered unable to vote, or more broadly to be stripped of some otherwise customary access to a measure of power or agency. To be disenchanted is to lose a fascination with something, in typical usage as a response to some event or sequence of events that places the object of disenchantment in a new and less favorable light.

Kind of, but anonymous instead of pseudonymous and also (kind of) ephemeral.

> Threaten someone however and police will have your adress shortly.

Impugn someone who’s well lawyered-up, and your contact info may be demanded by a order pursuant to a lawsuit for defamation, yes?