- Joined
- Jun 6, 2020
If life has taught me anything, especially in the past ~5 years or so, is that that there is nothing that can't be hand waved away in the face of overwhelming evidence.
đť•Ź / Twitter / X, the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter / "MUSK OWNS TWITTER"
- Thread starter Snigger
- Start date
Foghorns at a Funeral
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2022
I think that is more of a jab to that time Trump said he would "look in to" twitter before he had that repeal 230 spaz out that went nowhere. He is just saying Elon did what Trump said he would do and never did.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2021
Thanks for posting a screenshot instead of a link to the actual thread you fucking faggot. At least link to the other Kiwifarm thread.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2022
Libsoftiktok was apparently blacklisted from trending, other nefarious shenanigans. There are other tweets of interest, but this for me is the most interesting.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2020
This "multiple small posts" shit needs to stop. They could do a twitlonger or something to get all the info in one post for people to read. This is fucking attrocious for archival purposes.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2021
https://twitter.com/bariweiss/status/1601007575633305600
Here’s the link. I won’t be able to archive soon so I hope someone can cover. For anyone complaining about the format, keep in mind that if the files were just dumped somewhere the media would just ignore it. By dragging it out, the media is still going to ignore it, but at least everyone will see the media continually ignoring it while each piece slowly drops. This is death by a thousand cuts, not a hanging.
Here’s the link. I won’t be able to archive soon so I hope someone can cover. For anyone complaining about the format, keep in mind that if the files were just dumped somewhere the media would just ignore it. By dragging it out, the media is still going to ignore it, but at least everyone will see the media continually ignoring it while each piece slowly drops. This is death by a thousand cuts, not a hanging.
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
I'm not shocked in the slightest Twitter blacklisted and deboosted conservatives. When you have virtually every single major website on earth hosted in Silicon valley one of the most politically left places on the planet this is what happens. You also have to remember these fringe leftists believe lying and breaking the law is justified as long as it's for the progressive cause. It's okay to silence Nazi's because they are Nazi's!
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2018
I'm more interested in a potential link of the FBI to an alleged child trafficking scheme.
Manwithn0n0men
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2019
Polish Businessman
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2021
It's not that. It's the humanities-academia and the media, all over the world. The original SV founders were mostly libertarian, not leftist. And Jimmy Wales was an Objectivist, something precieved right-wing even then. It didn't help, the Cathedral still coopted his encyclopedia.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2021
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2022
This would deserve an "optimist" "rating" or "sticker," but of course the Farms are so much better and twitter is not nearly as cool.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 17, 2019
So we've seen pictures of the control panel before from when there was that insider attack at Twitter breaking into bluecheck accounts, but a more detailed view like this is fascinating.
- It's hard to tell, but it looks users of the Twitter control panel can access email addresses and IP addresses, but not by default on first view. The warning messages are cut off. Presumably hitting the "show this anyway" button triggers alerts and logging that goes further up the chain to ensure contractors aren't getting into mischief?
- Presumably individual freetext notes or something similar can be attached to accounts - hence the special warning up top.
- Tools to the left seem to allow an in-UI view of various aspects of that user's account.
- Seems like they have access to a user's DMs? Though always technically possible, you would hope this is locked down to people investigating abuse reports etc.
- What on earth is the "Guano" tool? I know IRL it's "bat shit", but in the Twitter context??
- Interactions seems to be some way of mapping who the account is in contact with.
- I am so very curious as to the list of all possible account keyword tags. How many are manually attached? What's just attached by a robot? Some just seem to be normal helper flags like the "Notifications Spike" one which I think triggers the special Twitter Mobile dialog which prompts you to turn off notifications on your phone if you have a hit tweet.
behindyourightnow
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- May 17, 2021
From the PhD dissertation of Yoel Roth, the former Head of Trust & Safety at Twitter (image from this tweet, full dissertation here):
"Strict, top-down controls" are bad, but only when they play into "child safety narratives" and restrict the inclusion of kids into the "queer social landscape."
"Strict, top-down controls" are bad, but only when they play into "child safety narratives" and restrict the inclusion of kids into the "queer social landscape."
Wallace
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2015
Here's a text dump of the thread.
1. A new #TwitterFiles investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users.
2. Twitter once had a mission “to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.” Along the way, barriers nevertheless were erected.
3. Take, for example, Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) who argued that Covid lockdowns would harm children. Twitter secretly placed him on a “Trends Blacklist,” which prevented his tweets from trending.
4. Or consider the popular right-wing talk show host, Dan Bongino (@dbongino), who at one point was slapped with a “Search Blacklist.”
5. Twitter set the account of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) to “Do Not Amplify.”
6. Twitter denied that it does such things. In 2018, Twitter's Vijaya Gadde (then Head of Legal Policy and Trust) and Kayvon Beykpour (Head of Product) said: “We do not shadow ban.” They added: “And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.”
7. What many people call “shadow banning,” Twitter executives and employees call “Visibility Filtering” or “VF.” Multiple high-level sources confirmed its meaning.
8. “Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool,” one senior Twitter employee told us.
9. “VF” refers to Twitter’s control over user visibility. It used VF to block searches of individual users; to limit the scope of a particular tweet’s discoverability; to block select users’ posts from ever appearing on the “trending” page; and from inclusion in hashtag searches.
10. All without users’ knowledge.
11. “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.
12. The group that decided whether to limit the reach of certain users was the Strategic Response Team - Global Escalation Team, or SRT-GET. It often handled up to 200 "cases" a day.
13. But there existed a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company’s policy on paper. That is the “Site Integrity Policy, Policy Escalation Support,” known as “SIP-PES.”
14. This secret group included Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust (Vijaya Gadde), the Global Head of Trust & Safety (Yoel Roth), subsequent CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.
15. This is where the biggest, most politically sensitive decisions got made. “Think high follower account, controversial,” another Twitter employee told us. For these “there would be no ticket or anything.”
16. One of the accounts that rose to this level of scrutiny was @libsoftiktok
—an account that was on the “Trends Blacklist” and was designated as “Do Not Take Action on User Without Consulting With SIP-PES.”
17. The account—which Chaya Raichik began in November 2020 and now boasts over 1.4 million followers—was subjected to six suspensions in 2022 alone, Raichik says. Each time, Raichik was blocked from posting for as long as a week.
18. Twitter repeatedly informed Raichik that she had been suspended for violating Twitter’s policy against “hateful conduct.”
19. But in an internal SIP-PES memo from October 2022, after her seventh suspension, the committee acknowledged that “LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy."
20. The committee justified her suspensions internally by claiming her posts encouraged online harassment of “hospitals and medical providers” by insinuating “that gender-affirming healthcare is equivalent to child abuse or grooming.”
21. Compare this to what happened when Raichik herself was doxxed on November 21, 2022. A photo of her home with her address was posted in a tweet that has garnered more than 10,000 likes.
22. When Raichik told Twitter that her address had been disseminated she says Twitter Support responded with this message: "We reviewed the reported content, and didn't find it to be in violation of the Twitter rules." No action was taken. The doxxing tweet is still up.
23. In internal Slack messages, Twitter employees spoke of using technicalities to restrict the visibility of tweets and subjects. Here’s Yoel Roth, Twitter’s then Global Head of Trust & Safety, in a direct message to a colleague in early 2021:
24. Six days later, in a direct message with an employee on the Health, Misinformation, Privacy, and Identity research team, Roth requested more research to support expanding “non-removal policy interventions like disabling engagements and deamplification/visibility filtering.”
25. Roth wrote: “The hypothesis underlying much of what we’ve implemented is that if exposure to, e.g., misinformation directly causes harm, we should use remediations that reduce exposure, and limiting the spread/virality of content is a good way to do that.”
26. He added: “We got Jack on board with implementing this for civic integrity in the near term, but we’re going to need to make a more robust case to get this into our repertoire of policy remediations – especially for other policy domains.”
27. There is more to come on this story, which was reported by
@abigailshrier @shellenbergermd @nelliebowles @isaacgrafstein and the team The Free Press @thefp
Keep up with this unfolding story here and at our brand new website: http://thefp.com.
28. The authors have broad and expanding access to Twitter’s files. The only condition we agreed to was that the material would first be published on Twitter.
29. We're just getting started on our reporting. Documents cannot tell the whole story here. A big thank you to everyone who has spoken to us so far. If you are a current or former Twitter employee, we'd love to hear from you. Please write to: tips@thefp.com
30. Watch @mtaibbi for the next installment.
2. Twitter once had a mission “to give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers.” Along the way, barriers nevertheless were erected.
3. Take, for example, Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (@DrJBhattacharya) who argued that Covid lockdowns would harm children. Twitter secretly placed him on a “Trends Blacklist,” which prevented his tweets from trending.
4. Or consider the popular right-wing talk show host, Dan Bongino (@dbongino), who at one point was slapped with a “Search Blacklist.”
5. Twitter set the account of conservative activist Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) to “Do Not Amplify.”
6. Twitter denied that it does such things. In 2018, Twitter's Vijaya Gadde (then Head of Legal Policy and Trust) and Kayvon Beykpour (Head of Product) said: “We do not shadow ban.” They added: “And we certainly don’t shadow ban based on political viewpoints or ideology.”
7. What many people call “shadow banning,” Twitter executives and employees call “Visibility Filtering” or “VF.” Multiple high-level sources confirmed its meaning.
8. “Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool,” one senior Twitter employee told us.
9. “VF” refers to Twitter’s control over user visibility. It used VF to block searches of individual users; to limit the scope of a particular tweet’s discoverability; to block select users’ posts from ever appearing on the “trending” page; and from inclusion in hashtag searches.
10. All without users’ knowledge.
11. “We control visibility quite a bit. And we control the amplification of your content quite a bit. And normal people do not know how much we do,” one Twitter engineer told us. Two additional Twitter employees confirmed.
12. The group that decided whether to limit the reach of certain users was the Strategic Response Team - Global Escalation Team, or SRT-GET. It often handled up to 200 "cases" a day.
13. But there existed a level beyond official ticketing, beyond the rank-and-file moderators following the company’s policy on paper. That is the “Site Integrity Policy, Policy Escalation Support,” known as “SIP-PES.”
14. This secret group included Head of Legal, Policy, and Trust (Vijaya Gadde), the Global Head of Trust & Safety (Yoel Roth), subsequent CEOs Jack Dorsey and Parag Agrawal, and others.
15. This is where the biggest, most politically sensitive decisions got made. “Think high follower account, controversial,” another Twitter employee told us. For these “there would be no ticket or anything.”
16. One of the accounts that rose to this level of scrutiny was @libsoftiktok
—an account that was on the “Trends Blacklist” and was designated as “Do Not Take Action on User Without Consulting With SIP-PES.”
17. The account—which Chaya Raichik began in November 2020 and now boasts over 1.4 million followers—was subjected to six suspensions in 2022 alone, Raichik says. Each time, Raichik was blocked from posting for as long as a week.
18. Twitter repeatedly informed Raichik that she had been suspended for violating Twitter’s policy against “hateful conduct.”
19. But in an internal SIP-PES memo from October 2022, after her seventh suspension, the committee acknowledged that “LTT has not directly engaged in behavior violative of the Hateful Conduct policy."
20. The committee justified her suspensions internally by claiming her posts encouraged online harassment of “hospitals and medical providers” by insinuating “that gender-affirming healthcare is equivalent to child abuse or grooming.”
21. Compare this to what happened when Raichik herself was doxxed on November 21, 2022. A photo of her home with her address was posted in a tweet that has garnered more than 10,000 likes.
22. When Raichik told Twitter that her address had been disseminated she says Twitter Support responded with this message: "We reviewed the reported content, and didn't find it to be in violation of the Twitter rules." No action was taken. The doxxing tweet is still up.
23. In internal Slack messages, Twitter employees spoke of using technicalities to restrict the visibility of tweets and subjects. Here’s Yoel Roth, Twitter’s then Global Head of Trust & Safety, in a direct message to a colleague in early 2021:
24. Six days later, in a direct message with an employee on the Health, Misinformation, Privacy, and Identity research team, Roth requested more research to support expanding “non-removal policy interventions like disabling engagements and deamplification/visibility filtering.”
25. Roth wrote: “The hypothesis underlying much of what we’ve implemented is that if exposure to, e.g., misinformation directly causes harm, we should use remediations that reduce exposure, and limiting the spread/virality of content is a good way to do that.”
26. He added: “We got Jack on board with implementing this for civic integrity in the near term, but we’re going to need to make a more robust case to get this into our repertoire of policy remediations – especially for other policy domains.”
27. There is more to come on this story, which was reported by
@abigailshrier @shellenbergermd @nelliebowles @isaacgrafstein and the team The Free Press @thefp
Keep up with this unfolding story here and at our brand new website: http://thefp.com.
28. The authors have broad and expanding access to Twitter’s files. The only condition we agreed to was that the material would first be published on Twitter.
29. We're just getting started on our reporting. Documents cannot tell the whole story here. A big thank you to everyone who has spoken to us so far. If you are a current or former Twitter employee, we'd love to hear from you. Please write to: tips@thefp.com
30. Watch @mtaibbi for the next installment.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2022
The government is the enemy of the people. Say what you want about Elon Musk, but the unraveling would never have happened under anyone else’s watch.
Alabaster Disaster
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2020
I actually find this way more revealing than the Hunter Laptop stuff we were given, and the level of cope we're seeing seems to confirm my reaction:
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
Kanye 2024 NEEDS Jacob Wohl as campaign manager.
They're boring to us because we already knew all this shit.
It's just nice the lying fucks who lied to us all these years can no longer deny it. Well, they can, but they're now obviously coping hard.
Oh, all those "conspiracy theories" turned out true. How shocking.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2019
Yuri Bezmenov said it best, even when presented with evidence, with legitimate documents, the other side might still just wave it away. Only until they feel the kick in their fat bottom, only then will they realize what they have been supporting. Still, those files have to mean something for the people who want to know the truth. Don't get demoralized.
SBG
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2019
The revelations were a bit mundane, but it did show Jack Dorsey had been dishonest/lying to congress about there not being some bias. He'll of course claim he just didn't know what was going on. Which pretty leaves two possibilities, Jack was complicit and promoting all the nonsense. Or more likely he was extremely hands off just letting everyone underneath him do their thing while seeing himself as very wizened and apolitical for letting the hyper political people have their way with everything.
Still in all this there's one thing that stands out to me and that's the odd number next to the follower count in this moderator panel. Because I don't believe that Charlie Kirk has nearly 200k verifieds following him while Libs of TikTok has about 800. So I feel like it can't be actual bluechecks, but maybe Twitter's idea of how many real people (or monetizable active users) they think are following the person.
Still in all this there's one thing that stands out to me and that's the odd number next to the follower count in this moderator panel. Because I don't believe that Charlie Kirk has nearly 200k verifieds following him while Libs of TikTok has about 800. So I feel like it can't be actual bluechecks, but maybe Twitter's idea of how many real people (or monetizable active users) they think are following the person.
