NaturalPhallacy

They still have integrity. That's seen as a flaw among partisan corporate media stooges who will dismiss any behavior if it benefits their party. Greenwald rants about this problem constantly.

>Elon banning journalists out of personal spite,

Fake news. They were doxxing. And only got 12 hour suspensions.

Treason? No. Flagrant violation of the 1st amendment? Yes.

> Aren't government agencies just organizing censorship under the guise of a platform's internal moderation?

Yes. They literally flagged pro-Cuban/Russian etc accounts they wanted banned. And asked had - for years - pro-war accounts that twitter boosted for them. That in violation of twitter's own policies they didn't flag as state run.

It's literal fascism in the original sense of the word. And the American left is making excuses for it because it's their side.

>The government should be prohibited from making such requests.

They are. The first amendment forbids the government from interfering with the press. They're ignoring it and hoping people don't know this fact. The fact that other media outlets aren't pointing this out, means they're all part of the same fascist tribe as the FBI.

Remember, fascism is the union of state and corporate power according to Mussolini's ghost writer. And it's what we're seeing here. The FBI and big tech being on the same side.

The First Amendment:

>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

It's since been expanded through court cases to extend from congress to every government entity including local ones.

The government is constitutionally forbidden from meddling with the press, even through private entities via the 14th amendment. The FBI and CIA meddled with twitter. The particulars aren't relevant. They're expressly forbidden from doing what they did.

After years (a decade+?) of holding out on password managers I finally gave bitwarden a shot (based on recommendations here), and was able to import ~900 logins from google chrome.

Their UI in the chrome extension (brave browser actually) for changing/editing logins could use a little work, but overall I'm pretty happy with it. I even bit the bullet and now have passwords I don't actually know involved in everyday life. Irritatingly, uploading a video from GeForce's live capture to youtube - despite logging in with 2fa - caused a security freakout at google and now I was forced to change my gmail password.

But I digress, bitwarden even integrates with iOS's login management as another option to Apple's, though irritatingly not on OS X.

Legally speaking, it is beer.

Hence the popcorn!

I think "porch pirate" is just a subset of thief. It's not a lesser crime, just one that's just more specific.

It's completely premeditated which is IIRC the main criterion for legally speaking 'murder'.

Ugh. That makes sense. Thanks for answering. What field was this in?

What was bad about it?

I don't think unions can never be net negative. I'm a huge fan of unions in fact.

But to a lot of people who oppose them, it's a more convincing statement that they're a balancing force for good than anything else I've come up with.

I usually say, "The only thing worse than a union is no union." because I'm aware that they can have negative effects. Police unions come to mind. I still wouldn't ban them though. Police unions should really be an example of how powerful they can be for the working class, if nothing else.

The bustiest times twitter has ever been have all been after he bought it, if you believe him.

And he's so controversial - even here - that all he has to do is keep fiddling with it and people flock to the circus with popcorn.

What evidence does anyone have that it's being destroyed? What are the metrics for any social media site being destroyed?

Thinking about myspace and digg - it seemed to be loss of user base. Does anyone have metrics independent of Musk/twitter insiders that it's losing users? Seems like https://alexa.com/ is dead...

>When I was in my 30s and had two small children, my appendix burst. It turned into a fairly routine procedure to remove it and get me back on my feet; but I realized that if I had lived even 100 years ago it probably would have been fatal.*

I've lost count of how many "ordinary" infections I've lived through thanks to antibiotics. One would have for sure killed me. A puncture wound on the bottom of my foot in a dirty river in the south.

We're not even 100 years into having antibiotics. A species just getting started tbh. I wonder what will come next that is similarly "magical" to antibiotics.

>(5700$/month)

How is this not profiteering?

I think there's also some effect if the flood of adrenaline and other chemicals causes your body and brain to essentially accelerate. Like a slowmo camera. Time didn't slow down, but you're acting and recording at a higher framerate for lack of a better analogy. So the recording (memory) feels like time slowed down.

I've defended Apple on a lot of occasions, but this is indefensible.

The only thing worse than a bad union is no union.

I think a reasonable law here would be: If you paid real money for services, you're entitled to direct human to human customer support.

>So time to play the same old game: does block chain provide any value here that a separate centralized DB doesn't?

Thank you for this. Reminds me of the form someone came up with about "Here's why your spam solution won't work" that was posted many times on slashdot in the '90s.

And they provided a link to Sweeney's tracking page.

People here keep omitting that part.

It's become really obvious that you're allowed to do that if you're hating on Musk/conservatives.

And it's really obvious why, too: https://i.imgur.com/taGzsZP.jpg

Since HN is basically the nerds from tech, it makes perfect sense.

Are there any Oracle employees that can comment on the hivemind?

You can even see it before you read it. Comments like yours that are entirely reasonable, and trying to protect what HN is supposed to be in good faith are being faded out of existence because you corrected misinformation that they prefer over the truth.

>> Both sides think the platform is institutionally biased against them.

But it was proven that one side was correct in the case of twitter:

Part 1: Matt Taibbi: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394

Part 2: Bari Weiss: https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601007575633305600

Part 3: Matt Taibbi: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1601352083617505281

Part 4: Michael Shellenberger: https://twitter.com/shellenbergermd/status/16017204550055116...

Part 5: Bari Weiss: https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1602364197194432515

Even Greenwald agreed with their assessment. Disagreeing with four of the best journalists alive today seems to me like someone drank some Kool-Aid.

Absolutely nothing brave about regurgitating Democrat rhetoric on HN: https://i.imgur.com/taGzsZP.jpg

To them there are no wrong actions (homophobia, body shaming et), only wrong targets (their tribe).

Now telling the truth in the face of that propaganda...

The part it contained about "10% for the big guy" (Joe Biden) was 100% newsworthy.

It wasn't fake news and deep down all the downvoters know it.

Suppressing it when it was known to be true was also a story.

>Twitter decided the responsible thing to do for them was not to be complicit in spreading fake news this time.

Actually they were at the forefront of spreading fake news as three actual journalists disclosed. Did you not even read the coverage? Because it sounds like you didn't. I even provided links to all of it above.

Let me know after reading it if your views have changed.

>Because it was a dubiously sourced story

Fake news.

>You can see how that might be something a platform would want to suppress, not because they’re Democrat sleeper agents

They suppressed it because they were very awake Democrat agents.

>but because they don’t wanna be responsible for swaying the election because of fake news.

No they wanted to deliberately sway the election, because of their partisan alliance. You can read the story here:

Part 1: Matt Taibbi: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598822959866683394

Part 2: Bari Weiss: https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601007575633305600

Part 3: Matt Taibbi: https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1601352083617505281

Part 4: Michael Shellenberger: https://twitter.com/shellenbergermd/status/16017204550055116...

Part 5: Bari Weiss: https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1602364197194432515

The Facebook page is where Sweeney said you could find the tracker...

>Those journalists weren't reporting specific locations of his jet...they were reporting on a legit news story about it.

Come on now. They were linking directly to the tracker that Sweeney was banned for, not just reporting on the story about it.

It was a childish petulant doxxing on purpose and they got treated the same as Sweeney.

How do you know no police report was filed? Are they public record in LA?

>Trump, and most right wingers were all banned from TOS violations and harassment and doxxing.

This is directly contrary to the reporting in Twitter Files by Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss, and Michael Shellenberger whose journalistic integrity and credentials exceed yours and mine combined by orders of magnitude:

"On Jan 7, senior Twitter execs:

- create justifications to ban Trump

- seek a change of policy for Trump alone, distinct from other political leaders

- express no concern for the free speech or democracy implications of a ban"

https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/16017204550055116...

And the only doxxing related to LibsOfTikTok was Taylor Lorenz doxxing LibsOfTikTok, to the point that Lorenz showed up at LibsOfTikTok's house in person herself. She didn't just doxx her, she went to her house in person. There are pictures.