Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Announces (More) Hate-Speech Fighting Tools (Again) (cnn.com)

Building on anti-harassment tools announced in November, Twitter is now "trying to shake its reputation as a haven for online harassment" with still more new internal algorithms and features, reports CNN. An anonymous reader quotes their report: The changes include preventing serial abusers from creating new accounts, a new "safe search" function and blocking potentially abusive and "low-quality" tweets from appearing in conversations, Twitter's engineering chief Ed Ho said in a blog post. Twitter is working on identifying users that have been permanently suspended and prevent them from creating new accounts, Ho said. This new measure specifically targets "accounts that are created only to abuse and harass others," he said, a problem that has long plagued the platform.

The new safe search function prevents tweets that are abusive, or from blocked and muted accounts, from appearing in users' search results. Those tweets can still be found if people want to see them, but they "won't clutter search results any longer," Ho said. And Twitter will now collapse tweet replies that are potentially abusive or low quality -- like duplicate tweets or content that appears to be automated. But those tweets "will still be accessible to those who seek them out," Ho said.

The blog post announces Twitter's ultimate goal is "a significant impact that people can feel," arguing that freedom of speech for all viewpoints is "put in jeopardy when abuse and harassment stifle and silence those voices."

10 of 341 comments (clear)

  1. Hate Speech by _KiTA_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let me give you an example of "Hate Speech" that I have been harassed and attacked over saying, including on this very website.

    "There are only two genders. Male and Female."

    Which pretty much sums up the problem with fighting "hate speech." The regressive left has co-opted and twisted the meaning of the already meaningless term "hate speech" -- along with other terms like "racism" or "nazi" -- to the point that they've lost all semblance of meaning.

    But "Twitter announces more [UnAmerican Political Censorship] tools (Again.)" doesn't have the same kick to it, I guess.

  2. The real brownshirts propagate on Twitter by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    After banning (and shadowbanning) quite a lot of Trump supporters, it seems like the Brownshirt alliance of Anti-Trump fascists is now only allowed to persist, but to prosper.

    Ask the people in Berkely who just wanted to hear Milo Yannopolis speak but were assaulted with flagpoles instead just who are the violent brownshirts of today...

    But I guess you consider it OK to beat women with flagpoles because they are just Trump supporters, right?

    Watch that video, I dare you to come back and say that Trump supporters are the brownshirts.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  3. Re:Doomed by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Twitter wants to have it both ways: it wants to have a big room where they can put in all the liberals and conservatives, all the Islamists and Zionists, and have them talk about whatever is happening in their world... and then it wants them all to get along. It doesn't work that way.

    If Twitter's actions of late are any indication, it would be more accurate to say that it wants to put everyone in a big room where only the SJW/liberal voices are allowed to talk and everyone else sits quietly out of fear of being banned like Milo.

    There is no such thing as one-way freedom of speech. If you're telling someone else that their speech is hate speech and therefore not allowed, you're ultimately hurting your own freedom just as much as theirs. As Robespierre could warn you, the rules and laws you make to oppress others today will be turned against you tomorrow.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  4. Re:limitations of the platform by hackwrench · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was writing a lengthy response that contained observations and conjectures about social media, when I hit upon one important factor. For some reason YouTube and Twitter seem to have sort of "media darlings", and that factor more than any other seems to indicate whether harassment happens.

  5. Re: The funny thing about protection... by hackwrench · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't really care for the content of that post to be protected, but I know that if I start drawing lines, it will only encourage people to draw lines that endanger speech that I think should be protected.

  6. Death threats against Trump are fine by walterbyrd · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think there is still an #assassinatetrump tag.

    Thousands of such threats are posted all the time.

    On the hand, Twitter has recently disabled the account of a cartoonist, with 1.3 million followers, because he offended a feminist.

    Any kind of anti-white hate is fine. Okay for Muslims to post hateful tweets against Jews, or anybody else, but it is not okay to offend Muslims.

  7. Re: The funny thing about protection... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't really care for the content of that post to be protected, but I know that if I start drawing lines, it will only encourage people to draw lines that endanger speech that I think should be protected.

    Oh, it's protected. It's just not protected in my fucking house. Or in Twitter's fucking house.

    And the person posting that does not have a right to demand there are no consequences. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  8. Escalation of Terms to Justify Censorship by Kunedog · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Disagreement is now harrassment.
    Mockery is now hate speech.
    Offense is now trauma.
    Criticism is now abuse.
    Compelling criticism is now violence.
    Anyone who talks about subjects the MSM wants to suppress is now a troll.
    Anyone at random is a racist/sexist/white supremacist/nazi/etc if they say so.

    The use of this alarmist (and usually, simply wrong) language is ubiquitous and deliberate. It's all a pretense to justify a disproportionate censorial "response," especially when they know no response is warranted at all. It's also a brazenly transparent tactic, especially since Twitter/Reddit/etc rarely seem to use it against users that properly align with their politics.

    This video is an excellent illustration of how the media lies about "online abuse" (and how even the crumbs that are true are exaggerated for false impact):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    P.S. It's also entertaining as Hell cuz Milo's a riot.

    1. Re:Escalation of Terms to Justify Censorship by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He's so full of self hate now that he's even become homophobic?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Re:lets look to the past by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    âoePolitical correctness is America's newest form of intolerance, and it is especially pernicious because it comes disguised as tolerance. It presents itself as fairness, yet attempts to restrict and control people's language with strict codes and rigid rules. I'm not sure that's the way to fight discrimination.

    This isn't about restricting or controlling people's language or fighting discrimination, it's about stopping harassment.

    Consider criminal law, assuming you don't care about safety or property or anything besides freedom, then what do you want for a set of laws?

    The easy answer is anarchy, but that's wrong because under anarchy a strongman will come in and take your freedom. The laws that give you the most freedom are also going to protect your safety and property, because if others are free to threaten you then you don't have freedom.

    The same applies to speech, giving people the freedom to harass gives them the power to silence.

    --
    I stole this Sig