Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Clampdown Could Impede Anonymous Tweets
judgecorp writes "Twitter is going to clamp down on abuse and 'trolling' according to its CEO Dick Costolo. Actions could include hiding replies from users who do not have any followers or biographical information. The difficulty is that moves to stop trolling could also curtail the anonymous Tweets which have been useful for protest in repressive regimes."
PlainBoards is just itching for its first batch of thousands of active users.
Adding censorship tools could aid censorship? I would guess that what's considered trolling if it's done to a comgressperson's feed is considered noble dissent it's done to a dictator who has suddenly lost popularity in the west. Will Twitter have an emal address to which one can apply for the "noble dissent" waiver?
aka "useful when the west sees the chance of insurrection and wants to ramp up the propaganda so it can install a new reactionary and cooperative government".
Revolutions don't happen on Twitter, no matter how much the lazy want to think they're suddenly enfranchised. Revolutions only happen in the corridors of power and, more rarely, on the street.
Twitter is a private enterprise, not a public service. They have every right to decide what they will publish.
I don't know how serious this threat is about "curtailing the anonymous Tweets which have been useful for protest in repressive regimes" But what twitter does need to block is the high amount of spam that is all so predictable...I can't believe twitter has not yet fixed it as the algorithm seems to be so simple to get rid of vast majority of it: 1) A person I do not follow "mentions me" i.e. Free iPhone here @chentiangemalc 2) This person has 0 followers, and usually also does not follow anyone else 3) They tweet this same message to 100s of people If a person wants to make "anonymous Tweets" or spam messages to themselves without mentions, then no problem for me. I can't believe though twitter has yet failed to block this kind of spam message.
The example given is ridiculous on its face. Biographical information can easily be faked-- a lot of the bots I've encountered swipe photos from Facebook and personals sites. Requiring a certain number of people to follow you, before you can... what? The only people this really hurts are newbies to the service. If you can automate creating an account, you can automate getting accounts to follow one another.
This has already been done. It's called 4chan. It's a good place to have anonymous discussions.
Posting as anonymous, because slashdot hates that website.
Because the idea that world has been built for you personally so as to never give you an uncomfortable moment is a bit silly.
I sure hope this troll stays around:
https://twitter.com/#!/stealthmountain
Since we didn't like what some individuals were saying in our "web 2.0" model we are now turning it into solely a broadcast medium for celebrities to promote their projects and plug their endorsements, and the "popular" to spew their random 140 character thought fragments that nobody with a brain cares about in the first place.
What could go wrong?
Thats cause its full of 12 year olds swapping porn and not much else
"Thats cause its full of 12 year olds swapping porn and not much else"
They should swap a few apostrophes and periods.
I just wish they'd block tweets that are directed straight at me, with a shortened link in them, from people I've never interacted with before.
0/10
Actually, porn is restricted to the "Adult" boards, which are only a subsection of the site.
Dilbert RSS feed
If the owners of a private technology like Twitter decide they should do something about the 'abuse' of their system, so be it. Hopefully they aren't hobbling its usefulness. I'm sure they're aware of the problem.
Perhaps it's better to allow users the ability to set their own levels of counter-community communications, and let the trolls continue to inhabit the dark spaces under the bridge. We all know they're there, and they need a place to lurk, otherwise they'll be tempted to come out into the light where they will surely shrivel under the scrutiny.
Maybe that's a better way to ensure civil behavior, if that's what you really want, start a 'troll tracker' and see what you can do to out the bastids!
Just remember, when you try to build a more fool-proof system, you are asking for nature to counter your efforts with a better fool.
Personally, I'd much rather be free of commercial solicitations than worry about the occasional troll.
it shall enter a time of.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
This has already been done. It's called 4chan. It's a good place to have anonymous discussions.
Posting as anonymous, because slashdot hates that website.
That's like going to Hooters for their menu.
I'm posting anonymous because I fear the revenge of the nerds.
Some time ago some sensible folks pointed out that there is no such thing as "cyber crime" just "crime". For the very same reasons, there really is no such thing as "your rights online", just "your rights" and I'd like to remind everyone that the concept of "rights" is not the same everywhere.
From the summary, it sounds like Twitter's efforts--purportedly to clamp down on abuse--can be easily bypassed by setting up two accounts instead of one, and entering a few fake fields.
So basically, it sounds like a way to artificially bump the number of accounts. So they may be looking to sell the company, or someone may be looking to artificially pad their resume.
-- IANAL, this isn't legal advice, and definitely isn't legal advice for you. Also, Squee!
...how is Twitter still relevant? Personally I think it makes a great single sign on service, but this whole 140 character limit they've imposed on themselves has rendered them useless for any kind of substantial communication IMO.
its over 50% of the site and by if you mean clicking an ok box its restricted I have a box of magic beans to sell you
I fear the revenge of the nerds
If you can't beat em, join em.
They let Ogre join, so you have a real good chance.
He means "restricted" as in "not allowed to post anywhere else".
Which means you don't have to see it if you don't want to look at it.
The trick repressive regimes use against anonymous comments is swamping, they flood boards and twitter with comments from paid supporters (usually young naive army men misled by clever manipulative old generals). Suppressing actual protests from ever being read by swamping them with thousands or tens of thousands of fake pro-repressive regime lies.
So this filtering is as likely to have a positive effect on that as a negative effect.
The fix for Egypt, BTW, is to get as many of the democratically elected supporters into the Egyptian army, thus undermining the generals control of the country.
Despite the fact that twitter played a part in several "revolutions", twitter never had freedom in its DNA. Just look at some of their actions:
Country specific censorship controls
Purchase and subsequent shutdown of Whispercore, an android build used for secure communications in Egypt
I also have a friend that was an organizer for OWS in NY during its inception, and he claimed that several of his tweets were removed.
LS
There is a fine line between being a cultivated citizen and being someone else's crop. - A. J. Patrick Liszkie
only trolls protest represive regimes
You guys have had your fun. Stop tweeting dick jokes at him and he'll turn the internet back on.
What is different, is what Rights the local gang with the monopoly on violence chooses to respect.
Your 'Concept of Rights' is based on the assumption that Governments Grant Rights.
Your concept of Rights believes that rights only exist if they are codified into Laws.
This is a flawed premise. Throw it out. Start again.
Here, take a big hit of this, now come on, another. That's it!
Now,put this Album on.
Exit the matrix.
You have much to ponder and much to learn.
Free yourself from the paradigm created by others to control you.
One day, far in the future, we will meet again and I will ask you what you have learned.
Why in gods name would you try to converse in /b/? There's a bunch of other boards quite hostile to the posting of porn.
The difficulty is that moves to stop the anonymous Tweets which have been useful for protest in repressive regimes could also curtail trolling.
but you disproved your point deeply by saying that
among a certain set, it is attractive to privatize everything
of course, in industries with a network effect (electricity, cable, telephone) and huge startup costs (power plants, car manufacturing) the effect is that a few large players dominate, an oligarchy. this is true of google and twitter and facebook as well
an oligarchy is not the same thing as a free market where consumers can easily and freely switch providers
this being true, there is no easy and obvious alternative. if i dislike the sandwich my deli made me, i can walk down a block to another deli. but there is no other twitter. well, there is, but, the network effect being what it is, it's like saying i'm going to drop verizon and take up cardboard cups on strings
so, in response to your comment, i say this: for fields dominated by a few large players, the government has the right, in your name, to regulate those players as if they were part of your government, and that it is not at all illogical to say that rights you hold your government to, such as free speech, be imposed on the private enterprise, because it is, after all, basically serving a public interest with no real competitors
you can't have it both ways: either the situation is truly like a free market, or it is like a government service. you can't point at an oligarchy and a monopoly and say the rules of walking down the street to another deli applies. there are no other choices, it's not really a free market
just because you privatized a service to a few huge players is not the same thing as a free market. you're just playing silly games because you believe capitalism is some sort of religion that answers all things, when it clearly doesn't
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
its over 50% of the site
There's 57 boards in total, of which only 17 are for +18.
It's not hard math.
by if you mean clicking an ok box its restricted I have a box of magic beans to sell you
I meant what I wrote: porn is restricted to the Adult boards.
Dilbert RSS feed
Also, it's tweeter. Who the fuck care besides journalists that try to validate that shit since forever but got all of then locked in a circle jerk.
marking them as adult boards is just so that it's easier for teens to find what they're looking for.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Ok, now compare the number of posts (or threads) in those categories and report to us what your "not hard math" tells you.
"Thats cause its full of 12 year olds swapping porn and not much else"
They should swap a few apostrophes and periods.
DO NOT start asking 4channers to 'swap periods'. It could get very icky very fast.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
You sound like a fanboi of 4chan. It's a sewer full of pederasts and pedophiles. Register an account as a 12yr old girl and post a lot of sexually precocious messages and see what happens.
>marking them as adult boards is just so that it's easier for teens to find what they're looking for.
So somehow 4chan is a threat to teen morality on the internet?
Do you know where teens go to find their porn?
Bing. Bing has the absolute best porn search algorithm bar none. Whatever your fetish, Bing will find it. It's better than Google, especially when you go to the video search.
Whining about 4chan like you are means you need to read the book Innumeracy.
By the way, 80 percent of everyone online admits to looking at porn. The other 20 lie about it.
--
BMO
I just love a nice tight twitter.
best bot on twitter. http://twitter.com/#!/StealthMountain
Your sig(k) has been stolen. There is a puff of smoke!
I've said that 1000 times already.
I set up @NetFreeUK a month or so ago and built up a following by retweeting and commenting on stories related to freedom of speech, individual privacy, dangerous Big Media legislation like ACTA etc. I've been meticulous in sticking to the rules - not spamming, replying politely to those with contradictory views etc .. but my account is currently suspended, as of several days ago.
I've appealed to Twitter, asking them to verify from my history that I've not broken any rules, heard nothing back after nearly a week. I'm assuming someone took a dislike to my views (e.g., defending Assange) and reported my account to silence it. If it's happened to me in this manner, I can't be the first.
So much for Twitter being an effective medium of free speech. Dissenters using it to share knowledge within repressive regimes like Syria can be easily silenced simply by officials reporting their account for "trolling" or similar - Twitter don't seem to bother verifying complaints. That could have disastrous IRL consequences. In my case it's just been a very effective method of putting me off advocating some important causes.
Anyone else run into the same problem with Twitter? Any advice on restoring a maliciously suspended AC?
"I meant what I wrote: porn is restricted to the Adult boards."
You, Sir, are an idiot. All the evidence one needs to spot a /b/ troll.
In the name of Science and All That Is Sane: begone, Vile Creature.
well i don't want to publish my bio info there are people jsut ready to grab those info and use them just not putting my info in twitter doesn't mean i am a awfull person
I like the concept; I don't particularly like most boards, particularly /b/. Same as Freenet and other anonymous and pseudo-anonymous systems.
Dilbert RSS feed
I don't go to /b/. The only boards I go to - and even those, it's rare - are /hr/, /lit/ and /wg/.
Dilbert RSS feed
Rule 34 has already taken effect.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"