Sure, it's indisputable. Tell the truth on the internet in China in some way that might interfere with the CCP, and you will be muted. It's terrible, but it's a done deal, a lost cause.
What bothers me much more is that westerners look past or even celebrate similar activities in the US when it suits them. For example, if a conservative speaks against the left in a way that might actually cause inconvenience, Twitter will fabricate a reason to suspend or ban them.
Recent examples? The NY Post's account was locked for a while when they were covering the Hunter Biden laptop story during the election. Twitter's reason? Violation of their "hacked materials" rule. The problem with that is simple: no one ever seriously thought that the materials were hacked, and indeed they weren't. More recently, James O'Keefe was banned after his exposes of CNN's biases. The alleged reason? Using multiple Twitter accounts (sockpuppets) for promotion. Nobody actually thinks it's true; coming up with a charge is just for appearances.
Twitter also silently degrades the follow-networks of conservatives. It also seems to artificially lower engagement with accounts they don't like; to hide replies of accounts they don't like; to automatically mark the media of accounts they don't like as "potentially sensitive" and thus hide them by default; to make arbitrary edits to the trending topics; to automatically annotate tweets with "officially correct" views and prevent liking, replying, or retweeting information deemed by Twitter to be wrong.
I often imagine HN as a cafe where hackers gather. In my mind, someone would be telling the other patrons about a new kind of Lisp, or the latest version of Bootstrap, or somebody's unconventional use of PHP, or some new thing Chrome is doing with cookies or whatever. And they might have to raise their voices and speak loudly because of the sound of clomping boots outside. But everyone knows that the gauchest thing you can do at the HN cafe is to acknowledge the sound of those boots, or to speak plainly about who's wearing them.
It's ironic that this comes from the NYT, because they're incontrovertibly part of the US version of the CCP that seems to be forming.
1 comment
[ 4.7 ms ] story [ 14.2 ms ] threadWhat bothers me much more is that westerners look past or even celebrate similar activities in the US when it suits them. For example, if a conservative speaks against the left in a way that might actually cause inconvenience, Twitter will fabricate a reason to suspend or ban them.
Recent examples? The NY Post's account was locked for a while when they were covering the Hunter Biden laptop story during the election. Twitter's reason? Violation of their "hacked materials" rule. The problem with that is simple: no one ever seriously thought that the materials were hacked, and indeed they weren't. More recently, James O'Keefe was banned after his exposes of CNN's biases. The alleged reason? Using multiple Twitter accounts (sockpuppets) for promotion. Nobody actually thinks it's true; coming up with a charge is just for appearances.
Twitter also silently degrades the follow-networks of conservatives. It also seems to artificially lower engagement with accounts they don't like; to hide replies of accounts they don't like; to automatically mark the media of accounts they don't like as "potentially sensitive" and thus hide them by default; to make arbitrary edits to the trending topics; to automatically annotate tweets with "officially correct" views and prevent liking, replying, or retweeting information deemed by Twitter to be wrong.
I often imagine HN as a cafe where hackers gather. In my mind, someone would be telling the other patrons about a new kind of Lisp, or the latest version of Bootstrap, or somebody's unconventional use of PHP, or some new thing Chrome is doing with cookies or whatever. And they might have to raise their voices and speak loudly because of the sound of clomping boots outside. But everyone knows that the gauchest thing you can do at the HN cafe is to acknowledge the sound of those boots, or to speak plainly about who's wearing them.
It's ironic that this comes from the NYT, because they're incontrovertibly part of the US version of the CCP that seems to be forming.