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."
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."
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. I'm not sure silencing people or forcing them to alter their speech is the best method for solving problems that go much deeper than speech.â
and
"Political Correctness is fascism pretending to be manners"
- George Carlin
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.
To put it more technically, Twitter's problem is that, as a social network, it reflects a connected graph of hundreds of millions of people. A lot of those people aren't going to like each other very much. Now they're making themselves responsible for the safety of their users, and that does two really bad things:
1) It announces that Twitter is presently an unsafe platform, and
2) It puts them in the middle of whatever fight any two people might have, equipped with no tools to resolve the underlying conflicts that drive those fights, and only their own subjective morals (with all the attendant biases those bring) to resolve them.
Twitter is at war with itself here.
Blasphemy reporting about a faith or cults reaction to cartoons? No cartoons posted, links to cartoons? SJW approved news sites about cartoons that might show cartoons then also get banned?
Communist party officials don't like been reminded of any terms surrounding Tiananmen Square and the use of numbers like 1989?
Whats left on the site that teams of SJW approve of?
Celebrities posting about events or their new projects? Only happy movie reviews are allowed by teams of SJW?
Governments posting "fictional" accounts of tourism in their repressive nations?
No mention of human rights issues or import/export deals to support wars?
SJW approved officials promoting their city or town projects can be helped to trend?
People posting real news or comments about such policies are removed and reported to their own governments?
Everyone fun or interesting expecting freedom of speech and freedom after speech will just follow the fun people to real US sites offering real freedoms.
Been banned and reported on by gov workers from other nations, by SJW and other groups does not make interesting people want to stay with any brand offering social media.
Censorship by a SJW in the name of a faith, gov, political party is not a selling point that attracts users.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
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.
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.
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.
Umm... your point being?
Yes, there are animals that can change their gender. In the end, you still have two distinct genders among them. They don't create a new gender that does ... what exactly during procreation? Watch and rate the act?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Ars Technica recently banned over 30 users because they referred to Bradley Manning as "him". No trolling, insults, or even hostility. Just using the wrong word.
SJW is a mental illness and a plague. They are fascists in the literal meaning of the word.
You seemed to have left out the Southern Strategy and the War on Drugs, which went a long way towards splitting the parties.
Conveniently towards the end of your timeline, Nixon during his 1968 campaign appealed to many dixiecrats who were upset about the passage of the civil rights act, stating it was a form of government encroachment on their lives. This in turn led to a party shift where former dixiecrats turned republicans and in time, the former republicans turned progressive. Once the parties flipped, you've got the War on Drugs for the 1970s and 1980s that heavily criminalized communities of color and anti-war liberals. Or as John Erlichman said it "We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news,"
Blacks, who were outright demonized by the right, turned to the left, which accepted them because who would not turn down the free vote. The left still treats black voters in a passive-agressive manner, knowing they can reliably count on the black vote, but the relationship is not as antagonistic as what is seen on the right.
So many right wing people love to crow about how Republicans freed the slaves and were responsible for most progressive legislation early on in this country. All that is true, but the conveniently leave out the part where Nixon and Lee Atwater flipped the parties, and when both Reagan and Bush used race based fear mongering to further drive the republican base whiter and more conservative.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/...
13 year old white supremacists are shitty web designers.