[HN Gopher] X's move to show users' location is a great step tow...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       X's move to show users' location is a great step toward online
       transparency
        
       Author : bookofjoe
       Score  : 28 points
       Date   : 2025-11-30 18:17 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com)
        
       | damnitbuilds wrote:
       | The point of early internet discussions was that "On the
       | internet, no-one knows you're a dog".
       | 
       | One could discuss things without the usual silly accusations of
       | sexism or racism or ageism or whatever because no-one knew the
       | characteristics of the other interlocutors.
       | 
       | X now broadcasting everyone's location and people self-announcing
       | their pronouns/race/age whatever are backward steps and make it
       | way to easy for the silly people who want to be victims rather
       | than argue the facts of an issue.
        
         | techblueberry wrote:
         | You're saying the great thing about the early internet is you
         | could be sexist and racist without being called out? I thought
         | the great thing about the early internet was the
         | experimentation and discovery on consistently evolving
         | technologies and ideas with like minded folks, but to each
         | their own.
        
           | zahlman wrote:
           | No, the point was that criticizing someone else wouldn't get
           | you wrongly accused of sexism or racism (as it commonly does
           | now), simply because everyone would be able to see the
           | accusation as absurd (it is logically impossible to
           | discriminate on the basis of _information you don 't have_).
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | At the same time, showing the IP/hostname you were connecting
         | from was also an early internet norm. IRC, SMTP, Usenet, etc.
        
         | tqi wrote:
         | There is no reason why "the point" of the internet has to be
         | dictated by people who happened to be online in 1995.
        
           | SilverElfin wrote:
           | Sure, it doesn't have to be dictated by anyone. But there is
           | still value in what the GP said. Considering ideas for what
           | they are, and evaluating them on their merits, is a better
           | way to discuss things.
           | 
           | In the least, showing locations (which can be faked), or
           | implying that someone in certain geographies is more
           | legitimate, is incorrect. If someone lives near me and is
           | commenting on some local issue, they can still post fake AI-
           | generated images, or spread misinformation, or mislead with
           | missing context, or whatever. Those problems still exist, and
           | the need to consider the information on its own merits still
           | exists. So what do you really gain?
        
           | wkat4242 wrote:
           | The internet was one hell of a lot better place to be back
           | then, just saying.
           | 
           | Though it's commerce that really broke it.
        
         | snowwrestler wrote:
         | "On the Internet, no one knows you're a dog" was a joke in a
         | New Yorker cartoon, and it was not written to be complimentary.
         | It definitely was not "the point" of early Internet
         | discussions.
        
           | simondotau wrote:
           | On the contrary, I read the cartoon as being _very_
           | complimentary, as it espouses the virtue of egalitarianism.
           | Why _should_ someone on the internet know that you 're a dog?
           | If you're campaigning for the eradication of cats, perhaps.
           | But even then, shouldn't we assume everyone is personally
           | motivated and that a good argument is a good argument?
           | 
           | There's an impossible balance to be found between total
           | transparency and not having to reveal all truths about your
           | being, such as your species.
        
           | bookofjoe wrote:
           | >On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Internet,_nobody_knows_.
           | ..
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | True but I usually give all fake info. Except my pronouns
         | because I want to support the LGBTIQ movement in this day of so
         | much hate against us.
         | 
         | But even when I sign to too a web shop or whatever I don't give
         | them my real DOB because they have no legit reason to want to
         | have it. I just randomise it and store it in my password
         | manager.
        
       | jauntywundrkind wrote:
       | Having made the API incredibly hard to access & having attached
       | incredibly harsh terms of service, both of which make X basically
       | impervious to the kinds of academic research that the firehose
       | there used to allow, there's really a feeling of X as Dark
       | Forest. You never know what propoganda network is out there doing
       | what, selling what, putting out whatever message it is you've
       | happened to alone and naked in the dark X forest. You are but a
       | (hu)man, with no ability to assess any background or context or
       | behaviors over the things you run into.
       | 
       | This was such a wonderful & amazing move. It's a small move! But
       | going from having nothing to having even a small breadcrumb of
       | context gives users _some_ understanding of the network around
       | them with: at least it 's _something_.
       | 
       | Thanks Sean & Zach for writing this up. Founder/executive types,
       | putting their word down about what a phase change this was, from
       | everyone just being utterly lost & adrift.
        
         | TZubiri wrote:
         | I remember in the early days Twitter was pretty open which
         | allowed a lot of hacking around hashtags, even in the
         | mainstream (like hashtags for popular brands, or during news
         | segments), I even saw twitter being used as a source for
         | academic research given how easy it was.
         | 
         | Eventually it was Embraced, Extended and, Extinguished by Elon.
        
       | bookofjoe wrote:
       | https://archive.ph/NnzuM
        
       | OGEnthusiast wrote:
       | I'm a bit surprised how under-the-radar this story is in the
       | mainstream press. It doesn't seem un-thinkable at all that in
       | 5-10 years, countries will have digital borders to block certain
       | countries from participating in their subset of the Internet.
       | There's no way a Trump or Trump-like figure wouldn't love the
       | ability to digitally block an entire country at their whim (like
       | how he is doing with tariff rates now). And unlike a decade ago,
       | it will be sold to the citizens with not much effort at all,
       | especially if the current wave of protectionism/nationalism
       | continues to hold.
        
         | homeonthemtn wrote:
         | I would love that as an option in general. Yes it can be abused
         | but that can be said for literally everything. The ability to
         | actually have local networks as an option would be a blessing
         | though.
        
         | ebbi wrote:
         | I can see a certain group of people that would be chomping at
         | the bit to be able to digitally block news and media coming out
         | of a certain place exposing war crimes for all to see.
        
         | Teever wrote:
         | For a while now I've been toying with the idea of national
         | governments creating official forums that require some sort of
         | verification of national ID to post on.
         | 
         | There are obviously a lot of other issues with social media
         | sites like Reddit or HN but imagine how different local
         | community subreddits would be if there was some way to know
         | that the person you're talking to actually has some personal
         | stake in the community and people there.
         | 
         | Personally I'd still want to slum it up on the non-regulated
         | social media sites but I'd post on the pseudo-anonymous
         | community sites and take what others have to say more seriously
         | on there.
        
         | genericacct wrote:
         | This is already happening in a number of countries in some way
         | or another
        
       | nwellinghoff wrote:
       | This is pretty easy to work around via vpns etc. Guess its
       | another barrier...for now. But it forces escalating tactics by
       | the other side to appear legit. So if ppl come to trust the
       | "source" information. It might actually end up worse in the long
       | run as the sources are all spoofed. Would need a more advanced
       | system using signatures and real life verification to actually
       | know a source. Similar to a ca with all of its drawbacks. Point
       | being, this move is kind of a wash.
        
         | dvngnt_ wrote:
         | I believe it also shows which country's app store the user
         | downloaded from which might be harder
        
         | TZubiri wrote:
         | But it was not expected, it's a one trick pony, but it worked.
         | There's a lot of accounts that were passing as being from one
         | country, and they ended up being some content farmer from a
         | third world country with a gdp per capita of 2000$.
         | 
         | It was in part fueled by Twitter's idea of paying content
         | creators, which made the whole thing an engagement bait party,
         | it gave an economic incentive to countries with cheap and idle
         | workforces to work 9 to 5 on posting whatever got likes without
         | even understanding it, even it was political.
        
       | snowwrestler wrote:
       | Yay for X publishing this, but only because it helps address a
       | problem that they created in the first place.
       | 
       | By paying a little bit of real cash money for hitting engagement
       | stats, X created an incentive for people in other countries to
       | fake the most engaging content they can find--which on X is
       | right-wing rage bait. It has high emotional content and X's
       | algorithm was tweaked to prefer it.
       | 
       | It's no different from the incentives that produced a flood of AI
       | slop on Facebook, as thoroughly reported by 404 Media:
       | 
       | https://www.404media.co/where-facebooks-ai-slop-comes-from/
        
       | SilverElfin wrote:
       | I disagree that this is a great step towards anything, and
       | thinking it is strictly just increasing transparency without
       | other downsides feels naive.
       | 
       | The obvious issues: lots of people use VPNs for privacy reasons,
       | even if they're not in a country with serious risks from
       | governments. Or they use the Internet while traveling and post
       | from other locations. Or they may engage in discussions that
       | affect them even if they don't live in a particular area. Maybe
       | they lived there previously or are going to move there.
       | 
       | But also, this has opened a whole new way to dismiss people and
       | their ideas based on location. For example, I see lots of
       | comments on X that have become outright racist, against people
       | allegedly posting from China, or Pakistan, or India. People with
       | politics on all sides are using the location info to claim their
       | opponents are falling for foreign propaganda - the left people
       | are posting examples of right accounts that are foreign, and
       | right people are posting examples of left accounts that are
       | foreign. But what's common is when these posts are made, it
       | encourages and brings out the most vile attacks against people of
       | different ethnicities or countries.
       | 
       | > X's recent bold decision, led by Head of Product Nikita Bier,
       | to add country labels to accounts reflects an important shift: a
       | recognition that geographic transparency is crucial context to
       | help users understand whether a post is a firsthand account or
       | distant commentary, whether it reflects genuine local sentiment
       | or coordinated foreign messaging.
       | 
       | Nikita is wrong about this. The location is not transparency that
       | is helping people understand whether a post is firsthand or
       | distant. Most things can be discussed well without location
       | playing a hand in what is being discussed. The actual real life
       | usage of this is to perform shallow dismissals and racist
       | attacks. Not to ascertain the veracity of some claim. Besides
       | that, how would location help? Anything can be faked with AI.
       | Even if someone genuinely lives in a particular location, they
       | can fake content, or mislead readers, or spread misinformation.
       | 
       | I'll also say I am not impressed by Nikita Bier, who is
       | apparently leading X's product. The way he communicates on social
       | media makes him look like an immature troll rather than someone
       | serious (example:
       | https://xcancel.com/nikitabier/status/1991723005454741995). I
       | guess it is fitting with the image carried by Elon and Twitter/X
       | these days, though.
        
       | milchek wrote:
       | One major thing this has exposed is how many people from non US
       | countries are grifting on the cultural war between the left and
       | right in the US by pretending to be on either side.
       | 
       | This kind of content still gets a lot of engagement and can be
       | pretty profitable for people in third world countries.
       | 
       | I think it's good that has been exposed. There is a difference
       | between me, as an Aussie, commenting on affairs in other
       | countries, vs straight up exploiting peoples fears by pretending
       | to be left or right wing, in the US, and sharing content to
       | further fan the flames between people on the political spectrum.
       | 
       | You could argue they can still post this content, but it's
       | already pretty clear people tend to disregard or ignore this kind
       | of rage bait when they realise the users are disingenuous.
        
         | gruez wrote:
         | >This kind of content still gets a lot of engagement and can be
         | pretty profitable for people in third world countries.
         | 
         | How does monetization work in practice? You set up a twitter
         | account saying that trans prisoners should get taxpayer funded
         | care, and then what? You drop a link to your gofundme? Shill
         | some betterhelp affiliate links?
        
           | crimsoneer wrote:
           | You just get paid per view on X posts now
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-30 23:01 UTC)