[HN Gopher] X violated its own policy by blocking First Amendmen...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       X violated its own policy by blocking First Amendment group's ads
        
       Author : saltysalt
       Score  : 74 points
       Date   : 2023-08-31 15:47 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
        
       | pierat wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | nancyhn wrote:
         | Update your model. That's a internet rumor spread by NPCs.
         | 
         | https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/11/17/elon-musk-emerald-min...
        
           | cmh89 wrote:
           | The person alleged to have owned the mine apparently does not
           | think it's a rumor
           | 
           | "Well, according to Errol Musk, the unsurprisingly eccentric
           | -- and in one major way, extremely creepy -- father of Elon,
           | the mine definitely exists. And come to think of it, he'll
           | take that Dogecoin, thanks!
           | 
           | "When I read that, I wondered, 'Can I enter, because I can
           | prove it existed," Errol told The Sun in a new interview,
           | referring to his son's Dogecoin tweet. "Elon knows it's true.
           | All the kids know about it."
           | 
           | https://futurism.com/elon-musk-dad-emerald-mine
        
             | nancyhn wrote:
             | So what?
             | 
             | From Snopes:
             | 
             | A story about Musk's father once owning an emerald mine
             | evolved into a larger rumor that had no evidence to support
             | its central claim.
        
               | cmh89 wrote:
               | So what? The person who is accused of owning the emerald
               | mine says they owned the emerald mine. That's at least
               | some evidence that its true.
        
         | partiallypro wrote:
         | Everyone is waiting on an alternative; Threads has basically
         | not had any features rolled out since it launched. Still no
         | trends, web interface, DMs, etc. Don't really know why they
         | even bothered rolling it out at all if they weren't going to
         | have those features out quickly.
        
           | taylodl wrote:
           | But do we _need_ an alternative? Maybe services like Twitter
           | have played out. Wouldn 't be bad for the world to move on.
        
           | wilg wrote:
           | Threads does have a web interface.
        
         | itsoktocry wrote:
         | > _You 're better off just leaving the platform._
         | 
         | It's still fine. Some things are better, some are worse.
         | Overall my experience hasn't changed much.
         | 
         | But, Elon's unpredictable, so who knows. I know for a fact I
         | don't care for Twitter/X to be the "everything app".
        
         | wilg wrote:
         | When someone mentions emeralds you know you can safely ignore
         | them.
        
           | mrguyorama wrote:
           | So is his dad lying when he openly talks about them owning an
           | emerald mine?
        
             | vuln wrote:
             | How much did the emerald mine produce? Who cares what his
             | father says. Would you care if Bill or Steve's dad was a
             | liar or lied about business deals? No? Okay.
             | 
             | Imagine getting "facts" off a family member "setting the
             | record straight" to a tabloid.
        
             | AlbertCory wrote:
             | The question is, why are _you_ on about it?
        
               | jrflowers wrote:
               | I like this game. Now the question is "why are you
               | interested in people posting about emerald mines?"
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | So clever to turn it back on me like that!
               | 
               | No thanks.
        
               | jrflowers wrote:
               | But that is the question now
        
       | tracker1 wrote:
       | They've also announced, they're re-establishing "trust and
       | safety" (censorship) teams under a different name/brand.
        
         | locopati wrote:
         | It is values not censorship to say that you value protecting
         | people from harmful speech in a private company.
        
           | tracker1 wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
             | SR2Z wrote:
             | Because one side of the aisle proposed solutions for COVID
             | like ivermectin, or "inject bleach," and said things like
             | "it'll blow over by March" and "if we stop measuring the
             | numbers will go down."
             | 
             | Both sides might have said incorrect things about COVID,
             | but only one was responsible for politicizing it to death,
             | and it's the side that tried to pretend it didn't exist
             | while it was massacring Americans.
        
               | tracker1 wrote:
               | It turns out, Ivermectin was helpful.. and nobody
               | legitimately suggested bleach other than in jest. As for
               | massacres, it's Democrat governors that thought it was a
               | good idea to house infected with the most at risk
               | (seniors) and killed countless people.
        
               | dpatru wrote:
               | The side that uses government power to censor its
               | opponents should automatically be suspect.
        
               | merpnderp wrote:
               | I mean your statement right there is full of
               | misinformation. No one said to inject bleach and no one
               | massacred Americans, unless you mean by housing the
               | infected in old folks homes, which killed far more than
               | any right wing shenanigans like ivermectin.
        
               | vuln wrote:
               | No one ever said "inject bleach" please stop. It was only
               | Harvard that inserted bleach into the conversation via
               | tweet.
               | 
               | "I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a
               | minute," Trump said. "One minute! And is there a way we
               | can do something, by an injection inside or almost a
               | cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it
               | does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it'd be
               | interesting to check that. So, that you're going to have
               | to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to
               | me."
               | 
               | Please don't inject bleach or drink disinfectant. Bleach
               | injections cause hemolysis (where your red blood cells
               | that carry OXYGEN break apart) and cause liver damage,
               | and many disinfectants can cause dangerous burns or
               | bleeding in your stomach. This tweet IS medical advice --
               | Harvard Toxicology (@Harvard_Tox) April 24, 2020
               | 
               | https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/24/trump-
               | disinf...
        
               | dude187 wrote:
               | Stop spreading misinformation
        
           | bdcravens wrote:
           | The two aren't mutually exclusive.
        
           | alienicecream wrote:
           | When did everyone become so afraid of what other people might
           | say? Or maybe it's when did it become so fashionable to be
           | afraid of what other people might say?
        
             | akomtu wrote:
             | One explanation I've seen is it's the need for emotional,
             | and now intellectual comfort. The average mind is small and
             | can deal with few ideas at a time. When such a mind is
             | exposed to a different idea, it's already overwhelmed with
             | the few it already has, and instinctively rejects the new
             | idea.
        
             | raisedbyninjas wrote:
             | We haven't figured out a great solution yet, but bad actors
             | and the cognitively challenged have been handed a megaphone
             | in the Internet and social media algorithms have given them
             | echo chambers. Speech informs action, so bad speech will
             | hurt _some_ number of people. It hurts flat-earthers to
             | people drinking bleach
             | https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-
             | updates/2020/0...
             | 
             | I don't know how Twitter will reimplement content
             | moderation, but I'd support something like what Google has
             | whenever somebody mentions 9-11 or COVID, etc, there is a
             | factual blurb there to attempt to moor readers to reality.
        
             | edmundsauto wrote:
             | The use of a spam filter suggests that some moderation is
             | widely acceptable. Another problem is how disinformation
             | spreads, which can cause significant harm when it
             | influences people's perspectives to not get the whooping
             | cough vaccine, for a fairly controversial example.
             | 
             | People are monkeys. Monkey see, monkey do.
        
             | locopati wrote:
             | When people realized that violent speech can be considered
             | violent action as random people took the fearmongering and
             | attacked other people or threatened to bomb hospitals and
             | libraries in stochastic terrorist attacks.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_terrorism
        
               | slowmovintarget wrote:
               | Violence is the use of physical force to injure, abuse,
               | damage, or destroy.
               | 
               | Writing and speech does none of those things. It may
               | inspire people to take those actions, but that does not
               | make it violence in and of itself.
               | 
               | We can discuss the morality of speech and writing that
               | stimulates others to violent action without the coercive
               | construction of attempting to convince people they are
               | the same thing.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | hawski wrote:
       | The day I will stop taking it first to mean X11/X.org will be a
       | sad day for me. With this publicity I imagine more people
       | visiting x.org. I wonder what will happen to it in a couple of
       | decades.
        
       | noughtme wrote:
       | 5500 words to say the ad was blocked in error:
       | 
       | 'According to X, the account had been labeled as political in
       | 2020 "when political ads were prohibited"'(prior to Musk's
       | takeover)
        
         | th0ma5 wrote:
         | Still very much needs to be discussed. Now that they've opened
         | the can of worms of being a political entity, it most certainly
         | was a political decision not to find cases like this within
         | their own systems that they should know about. Are they really
         | prepared or are they going to further cave to the Saudis?
        
           | tasogare wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | brookst wrote:
           | I don't think we should expect them to cave to the Saudis.
           | There may be higher bidders.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | tensor wrote:
         | This really begs the question, when they removed the policy why
         | did they not remove all the existing blocks and labels? Sounds
         | fishy to me.
        
           | decremental wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | atkailash wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | vuln wrote:
           | Happened to people still shadow banned by the twitter dick
           | detector
        
           | paulddraper wrote:
           | Likely not a reason, just a mistake.
           | 
           | I don't see the reason for deliberately doing it.
        
           | delecti wrote:
           | My understanding is that there isn't an abundance of people
           | around at Xitter these days to do that kind of due diligence.
           | "Nobody had time to go through and unblock all the people
           | blocked under the old policy" doesn't sound fishy to me at
           | all.
        
             | nogridbag wrote:
             | Having lots of Chinese friends, whenever I see the letter X
             | at the start of a word, I instinctively try to pronounce
             | the X as a "Sh" sound. And this definitely isn't the first
             | time this happened. Every time these Twitter/X threads
             | comes up I have to laugh at some of these spellings :)
        
         | croes wrote:
         | 5500 words to show how much endurance you need to get behind
         | the auto response until X checks if they made an error.
         | 
         | Your version sounds like they just asked and the ban was lifted
         | because it was an error.
         | 
         | That's not what happened.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | raydiatian wrote:
       | Twitter. Twitter. Twitter.
       | 
       | Not X.
        
         | paulddraper wrote:
         | ? what do you mean
        
           | ta757579 wrote:
           | They mean that we humans are under no obligation to comply
           | with a corporations branding strategies.
           | 
           | See also: Google/Alphabet,
           | Blackwater/MurderInc/Whatevertheyrecallednow
        
             | paulddraper wrote:
             | Okay.
             | 
             | Though for me personally, if someone changes their name, I
             | usually try to call them by that name. But usually not the
             | easiest, I admit.
        
               | clipsy wrote:
               | Corporations aren't people.
        
         | badwolf wrote:
         | The owner himself is against transitioning, so it only seems
         | right to deadname his company.
        
         | timbit42 wrote:
         | Xitter.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-08-31 23:02 UTC)