This quickly went from “interesting concept” to “of course twitter went the path of least work/thought” and is a giant new vector for the fuck bigots to harass and get people banned
there is no plan that wouldn't lead to a way that twitter could fuck over vulnerable people.
personally I prefer the blanket option (though of course we still have to fight the 'what is politics' battle) to the idea of them parsing what's "true" or like "dangerous" or whatever.
No see there are already laws that define political advertising. That part (a ban on those ads) should have been easy.
Twitter has indicated they are going to be dumb as shit about this and not use that framework, though
I've lost networking opportunities by refusing to have a facebook profile, and I am a thorn in the side of my relatives' efforts to organize family gatherings on social media. I have everything to gain if facebook suddenly disappears
I don’t see how this would change. Some other platform would fill the void and you’d be right back in the same position (or one close enough to be mostly indistinguishable to it) shortly thereafter.
Unless all social media is blown up and made illegal or something, another group will step up. Oh sure, getting buy in from everyone would be a challenge, but once enough momentum went to one of them, I suspect we’d end up roughly where we are now, though hopefully with less incompetence and greed and whatnot.
I feel pretty comfortable competing against the likes of LinkedIn, and I have elegant private cloud and correspondence solutions for family members abandoned by toxic social media. Believe me, I am set up for a facebook exodus.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
That's kinda their plan. Announce an announcement with no details to criticize. Try to stop the conversation for long enough so that people find something else to be mad about. There are no shortage of things to be mad about, and social media is really bad at multitasking.
Yeah, when the examples of what the policy will entail explicitly say things like "you won't be allowed to have ads discussing climate change because objective truths that some people don't accept are now politics" the uncertainty isn't whether the policy will be awful as much as how awful the policy's particulars will be.
+14
Options
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
But in recent days, it’s become clear that there are some problems with Twitter’s new policy. For example: It’s easy to determine which ads are about specific candidates. But what is Twitter’s definition of a political “issue ad,” exactly? How does Twitter plan to enforce what is one, and isn’t one?
These questions have serious implications for the climate fight. For example, a HEATED investigation identified more than a dozen tweets from ExxonMobil related to climate change that are not currently labelled by Twitter as political “issue” ads. Under the new policy, these ads will be permitted to run after November 22, while environmental groups’ climate-related ads will be banned.
Asked to explain why Exxon’s climate-related ads are not political, Twitter declined to comment.
But in recent days, it’s become clear that there are some problems with Twitter’s new policy. For example: It’s easy to determine which ads are about specific candidates. But what is Twitter’s definition of a political “issue ad,” exactly? How does Twitter plan to enforce what is one, and isn’t one?
These questions have serious implications for the climate fight. For example, a HEATED investigation identified more than a dozen tweets from ExxonMobil related to climate change that are not currently labelled by Twitter as political “issue” ads. Under the new policy, these ads will be permitted to run after November 22, while environmental groups’ climate-related ads will be banned.
Asked to explain why Exxon’s climate-related ads are not political, Twitter declined to comment.
The policy isn't set until the 15th, so it's good to keep pressure on them, but the goal should be ensuring ads critical of Exxon are allowed, not blocking ads about their latest carbon capture tech.
This is an excellent example of "keeping politics out of it" is a nonsensical idea. So long as they're politics Jack is accustomed to he'll let them go right on ahead.
How many people here still use Twitter? I'm sure it's probably been brought up before, but like, at what point is enough enough and you just stop? They're clearly not managing their platform better and it doesn't look like they will anytime in the near future, either.
How many people here still use Twitter? I'm sure it's probably been brought up before, but like, at what point is enough enough and you just stop? They're clearly not managing their platform better and it doesn't look like they will anytime in the near future, either.
I still use it and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. As an aspiring writer, there's not another place on the internet that's anywhere near as useful for contacts and networking.
The problem is one of legacy. WriterTube is fine if all you're into is the voyeur side of craft. FB doesn't encourage the kinds of interaction that's possible with Twitter. Instagram needs images and that's not nearly as relevant with writing. Twitter is nearly perfect for writers chatting and needing help.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
How many people here still use Twitter? I'm sure it's probably been brought up before, but like, at what point is enough enough and you just stop? They're clearly not managing their platform better and it doesn't look like they will anytime in the near future, either.
TetraNitroCubaneThe DjinneratorAt the bottom of a bottleRegistered Userregular
edited November 2019
I still have Twitter accounts - Mostly because various subcultures I am a part of use Twitter extensively for their communication and networking. That's died down in recent months mostly due to the fact that I (and many of my subculture compatriots) have moved to other platforms (Mostly Mastodon, which does a much better job at what I want and need out of a communication platform).
I use Twitter these days for one thing alone: Keeping up with artists I enjoy, as their Twitter feeds remain the primary place to view their new art, find they are open for commissions, etc.
I still dislike Twitter immensely, mostly for the firehose of awful it becomes constantly. I don't dare say much on there, and I hate seeing the dogpiles that happen to people I care about. But for keeping up with certain people, this is pretty much the only way for now. (Best believe I'm using some aggressive means of blocking ads and promoted tweets, too).
I don't ever try to interact with it but I do keep a tightly curated feed of writers that I enjoy. There's nothing else like it in that regard, particularly with how often people are forced to write at multiple sites.
+2
Options
I ZimbraWorst song, played on ugliest guitarRegistered Userregular
I use Twitter. Like, a lot, and plan to keep doing so. It's definitely a fucked up platform but it's exposed me to a lot of people and views from marginalized groups that I wouldn't have been otherwise. I also curate my feed and block liberally, which makes the whole experience more pleasant.
But in recent days, it’s become clear that there are some problems with Twitter’s new policy. For example: It’s easy to determine which ads are about specific candidates. But what is Twitter’s definition of a political “issue ad,” exactly? How does Twitter plan to enforce what is one, and isn’t one?
These questions have serious implications for the climate fight. For example, a HEATED investigation identified more than a dozen tweets from ExxonMobil related to climate change that are not currently labelled by Twitter as political “issue” ads. Under the new policy, these ads will be permitted to run after November 22, while environmental groups’ climate-related ads will be banned.
Asked to explain why Exxon’s climate-related ads are not political, Twitter declined to comment.
I see those as regular tweets though and not as promoted ads? Normally promoted ads have a lot more coverage.
I barely used twitter the only thing that stopped me as I forgot my password
As I said earlier I barely use facebook anymore {not because of the forced name change}
0
Options
Zilla36021st Century. |She/Her|Trans* Woman In Aviators Firing A Bazooka. ⚛️Registered Userregular
I still use it. Really your experience with it depends on how you curate your feeds, your input/output. Input, source select, etcetera.
I also don't seek confrontation on there because it's pointless. Nobody is going to convince anyone of and/or about anything, IMO.
"New Trump Facebook ad: "The far left knows that they have NO CHANCE of defeating President Trump in 2020, so they’ve resorted to violence to try to silence the MILLIONS of American Patriots who voted for him.""
- Judd Legum is a blogger with some decent credentials, and the creator of ThinkProgress.
Calling out the left as having already "resorted to violence"*, to people who consider the 2nd Amendment sacrosanct, and through which Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground are philosophies to live by, I can absolutely see this being used as a call for pro-active "self defense".
* I'd like a cite for that. Not expecting one, though.
The second para is even more daunting.
"We need to show radical left that they will NEVER be able to silence us with violence and their hatred."
I wonder how they hope their supporters will show the radical left that?
This is fucking disgusting, and yet, I'm not surprised this isn't their next move.
EDIT: That at LEAST two domestic terrorist attacks have been directly linked to Trump's rhetoric (Florida bombings, Philadelphia mosque shooting), means that either they just don't fucking care if what they say causes violence, or they're actively rooting for it.
"New Trump Facebook ad: "The far left knows that they have NO CHANCE of defeating President Trump in 2020, so they’ve resorted to violence to try to silence the MILLIONS of American Patriots who voted for him.""
- Judd Legum is a blogger with some decent credentials, and the creator of ThinkProgress.
Calling out the left as having already "resorted to violence"*, to people who consider the 2nd Amendment sacrosanct, and through which Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground are philosophies to live by, I can absolutely see this being used as a call for pro-active "self defense".
* I'd like a cite for that. Not expecting one, though.
The second para is even more daunting.
"We need to show radical left that they will NEVER be able to silence us with violence and their hatred."
I wonder how they hope their supporters will show the radical left that?
This is fucking disgusting, and yet, I'm not surprised this isn't their next move.
EDIT: That at LEAST two domestic terrorist attacks have been directly linked to Trump's rhetoric (Florida bombings, Philadelphia mosque shooting), means that either they just don't fucking care if what they say causes violence, or they're actively rooting for it.
"New Trump Facebook ad: "The far left knows that they have NO CHANCE of defeating President Trump in 2020, so they’ve resorted to violence to try to silence the MILLIONS of American Patriots who voted for him.""
- Judd Legum is a blogger with some decent credentials, and the creator of ThinkProgress.
Calling out the left as having already "resorted to violence"*, to people who consider the 2nd Amendment sacrosanct, and through which Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground are philosophies to live by, I can absolutely see this being used as a call for pro-active "self defense".
* I'd like a cite for that. Not expecting one, though.
The second para is even more daunting.
"We need to show radical left that they will NEVER be able to silence us with violence and their hatred."
I wonder how they hope their supporters will show the radical left that?
This is fucking disgusting, and yet, I'm not surprised this isn't their next move.
EDIT: That at LEAST two domestic terrorist attacks have been directly linked to Trump's rhetoric (Florida bombings, Philadelphia mosque shooting), means that either they just don't fucking care if what they say causes violence, or they're actively rooting for it.
Hint: It's the second one
From Lincoln to MLK Jr. to Dr. George Tiller, the play has been the same: Rile up terrorists so they murder political opponents to scare the rest into "bipartisanship".
No, the mistake was letting it be run by privileged techbros who have no comprehension of how it can be abused.
How do you make it so people don't own what they code?
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
No, the mistake was letting it be run by privileged techbros who have no comprehension of how it can be abused.
How do you make it so people don't own what they code?
You can regulate things, including governance structure, etc
Like, a review board that approves all publicly released web applications, or one that puts a hard limit on user account numbers for exemption?
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I dunno, sounds like something a consumer privacy protection bureau may want to noodle on
The upside is that it's similar in structure to most administrations involved in research, so existing regulations can carry over. The downsides are that it becomes much harder for anybody to create a new version of any social media, and the government will eventually have access to the personal information of everybody that's registered with a popular social media network. That's what's probably going to happen to give teeth to audit power.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I dunno, sounds like something a consumer privacy protection bureau may want to noodle on
The upside is that it's similar in structure to most administrations involved in research, so existing regulations can carry over. The downsides are that it becomes much harder for anybody to create a new version of any social media, and the government will eventually have access to the personal information of everybody that's registered with a popular social media network. That's what's probably going to happen to give teeth to audit power.
I’m sorry I have a hard time mustering up any fucking shits at all
Posts
No see there are already laws that define political advertising. That part (a ban on those ads) should have been easy.
Twitter has indicated they are going to be dumb as shit about this and not use that framework, though
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I feel pretty comfortable competing against the likes of LinkedIn, and I have elegant private cloud and correspondence solutions for family members abandoned by toxic social media. Believe me, I am set up for a facebook exodus.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Yeah there are a lot of problems with money in elections, but...
The Dark Money PAC ads are still classified as political ads. That part should have been incredibly easy for Twitter...
Admittedly their previous moderation does leave a lot of room for criticism
They followed up with examples and more details, so we're not just randomly speculating.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
The policy isn't set until the 15th, so it's good to keep pressure on them, but the goal should be ensuring ads critical of Exxon are allowed, not blocking ads about their latest carbon capture tech.
I still use it and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. As an aspiring writer, there's not another place on the internet that's anywhere near as useful for contacts and networking.
The problem is one of legacy. WriterTube is fine if all you're into is the voyeur side of craft. FB doesn't encourage the kinds of interaction that's possible with Twitter. Instagram needs images and that's not nearly as relevant with writing. Twitter is nearly perfect for writers chatting and needing help.
I do for PAX tickets.
I started to use it a bit years ago, but never got super into it. So it was really easy to give up when they were obviously bad years ago
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
I use Twitter these days for one thing alone: Keeping up with artists I enjoy, as their Twitter feeds remain the primary place to view their new art, find they are open for commissions, etc.
I still dislike Twitter immensely, mostly for the firehose of awful it becomes constantly. I don't dare say much on there, and I hate seeing the dogpiles that happen to people I care about. But for keeping up with certain people, this is pretty much the only way for now. (Best believe I'm using some aggressive means of blocking ads and promoted tweets, too).
You don't need it for that. Tweets can be viewed without having an account.
Praise the Sun!!!
I see those as regular tweets though and not as promoted ads? Normally promoted ads have a lot more coverage.
As I said earlier I barely use facebook anymore {not because of the forced name change}
I also don't seek confrontation on there because it's pointless. Nobody is going to convince anyone of and/or about anything, IMO.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/trump-ad-facebook-violence-far-left_n_5dc324b5e4b0d8eb3c8efad4?utm_hp_ref=ca-us-politics
Linking the following tweet.
"New Trump Facebook ad: "The far left knows that they have NO CHANCE of defeating President Trump in 2020, so they’ve resorted to violence to try to silence the MILLIONS of American Patriots who voted for him.""
- Judd Legum is a blogger with some decent credentials, and the creator of ThinkProgress.
Calling out the left as having already "resorted to violence"*, to people who consider the 2nd Amendment sacrosanct, and through which Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground are philosophies to live by, I can absolutely see this being used as a call for pro-active "self defense".
* I'd like a cite for that. Not expecting one, though.
The second para is even more daunting.
"We need to show radical left that they will NEVER be able to silence us with violence and their hatred."
I wonder how they hope their supporters will show the radical left that?
This is fucking disgusting, and yet, I'm not surprised this isn't their next move.
EDIT: That at LEAST two domestic terrorist attacks have been directly linked to Trump's rhetoric (Florida bombings, Philadelphia mosque shooting), means that either they just don't fucking care if what they say causes violence, or they're actively rooting for it.
Hint: It's the second one
PSN/Steam/NNID: SyphonBlue | BNet: SyphonBlue#1126
No, the mistake was letting it be run by privileged techbros who have no comprehension of how it can be abused.
From Lincoln to MLK Jr. to Dr. George Tiller, the play has been the same: Rile up terrorists so they murder political opponents to scare the rest into "bipartisanship".
How do you make it so people don't own what they code?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
You can regulate things, including governance structure, etc
Like, a review board that approves all publicly released web applications, or one that puts a hard limit on user account numbers for exemption?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The upside is that it's similar in structure to most administrations involved in research, so existing regulations can carry over. The downsides are that it becomes much harder for anybody to create a new version of any social media, and the government will eventually have access to the personal information of everybody that's registered with a popular social media network. That's what's probably going to happen to give teeth to audit power.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I’m sorry I have a hard time mustering up any fucking shits at all
Steam | XBL