I've been tracking conflations & confusions in the #TwitterFiles2 fight, so here's another one: accounts that re algorithmically suppressed/deboosted (what some are calling "shadow bans") vs. accounts whose tweets are hidden but you can click to reveal. slate.com/technology/201…
The treatment of some accounts described in the 2018 article quoted above has the following qualities:
1. Applies to the whole account (vs. to some tweets)
2. Advertised as being about abuse (not, crucially, disinfo)
3. You can still see the tweets if you click to reveal
What is revealed in the #TwitterFiles is different. It shares #1 above -- applies to the whole account (not to tweets). But the allegation is that tweets from the account aren't shown to as many users in their "top tweets" TL & are held back from trending.
So for the list of conflations so far, it's:
1. Applies to accounts vs. applies to tweets
2. Applies to abuse/spam/hate speech vs. applies to disinformation or political viewpoints
3. Is deboosted in top tweets + trending or is pushed down & hidden behind click-to-reveal.
There are permutations of all of these confusions going around, which is why this argument has such a strong flavor for some of "omg my opponents are morons who can't read" & for others of "wow we're all talking past each other."
Really nobody on either side has been rigorous enough about laying out exactly what they're alleging. Both are using some of the same terms in radically different ways. If you're going to jump into this fight, you need to always list out the specific practices you're discussing.
Of course, Twitter itself strongly disincentivizes us listing out explicitly what we're alleging has been revealed (or alleging was always known about) because of the character limit. It's almost designed to make us talk past each other by forcing us to speak in short references.
Alice: We now know Twitter is deboosting accounts.
Bob: OMG moron *links to old article about how Twitter is hiding tweets*

Alice: Seems Twitter was doing viewpoint discrimination under banner of "disinfo"
Bob: OMG plz *links to old article about twitter suppressing hate speech*
Also yes, this. There is a ton of this going on, but IMO also many cases of people who really do think they're right but are confusing and conflating the things above.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with jonstokes.(eth|com)

jonstokes.(eth|com) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jonst0kes

Dec 11
The people who write these critiques won’t engage with any pushback. Not on here & not in any venue. They’ve been repeating the same points for years & ignoring/smearing their critics. Now they’re mad no one listens to them anymore. 🤷‍♂️ wired.com/story/large-la…
The recent Galactica meltdown was a case in point. They smear & attack, then when anyone pushes back they ignore that person & repeat themselves. It’s always the same arguments & the same examples. Literally years old examples that show up again and again. Anyway, stay mad.
The pattern here is that for them, “I was ignored” == “the people I was yelling at didn’t agree to make the changes I insisted on.”

But for the rest of us, that’s not how it works. We’re expecting a dialogue & some consensus-seeking activity. Not, “no debate!”
Read 8 tweets
Dec 10
Again, for any of this to definitely be true, you need a model of "intelligent,"which Chollet does not have & which nobody has. How does he know that the brain is not "a record" to use his language from this thread.

He may be right, but he can't prove it. He also may be wrong.
On some number of levels, yes of course these models are not brains. But if you're going to make the strong case of "it's just math, unlike the conscious mind" then you really need a way to demonstrate that the conscious mind isn't the product of similarly structured "math."
I find this discussion as tiresome as others find "AI hype." If you don't know what the conscious mind is doing, then stop insisting that what an ML model is doing is totally different than what the conscious mind is doing.

That you shouldn't do this seems obvious to me.
Read 10 tweets
Dec 9
I’ve been trying to think of who could’ve gotten the files that most people would’ve more or less trusted to be fair, but not only is there no Cronkite on the hellsite literally everyone is polarizing to very many people.
Example: A friend I’m aligned with proposed a journo they think could’ve been good for this & I clicked the handle to find I block that person lol. Me, I might try to please the max # of ppl by naming neolib centrists like @mattyglesias or @Noahpinion, but they’re HATED by many.
In fact, just me tagging them in the previous tweet as names I might nominate in a compromise, please-everyone kind of way is going to send a bunch of my followers into orbit and/or to the “unfollow” button. Given these circumstances, I now think Musk 100% made the right calls.
Read 4 tweets
Dec 9
In addition to the conflation of public policies against abuse/spam w/ secret polices against political viewpoints & topics, the other bit of conflation I'm seeing right now is amplification/suppression of tweets vs. of accounts. This is an example of the second type:
Twitter's internal data suggests that righty tweets perform better than lefty tweets -- they seem to get some benefit from the algo. That's a different issue than targeted deboosting of prominent right-wing accounts.
I haven't seen anyone claiming that all right-wing accounts on this site have been deboosted. The claim is that prominent accounts with certain viewpoints on hot-button issues were deboosted, & those often fell on the right side of the spectrum. That can be true alongside...
Read 13 tweets
Dec 9
Ok I finally looked into the discourse around "did they or really 'shadow ban' or are people lying/confused," & my sense is that it's the same as the fight over "were @DrJBhattacharya's covid takes were 'disinfo.'" It's a dispute about who gets to say what words mean.
Twitter has a specific definition of "shadow ban" that doesn't square w/ how the term is often used. Twitter had a definition of "disinfo" that doesn't square w/ what others think. Folx have a definition of "harassment" that to me means "a large account QT'd me to criticize."
All we do anymore is fight over who gets to say what words mean. Same as it ever was.
Read 5 tweets
Dec 9
These are good questions from Eric, & I obviously have an opinion on what the answer is, but I think we do need more examples & evidence. @jack was right -- just release everything in a big archive.

That won't end the debate, but it'll change it for the better. Here's how:
I see in replies from Eric & others that there are varied medical takes from experts that they'll place in different buckets like "ban-worthy disinfo", "dangerous & wrong but permitted," "seemed accurate at time," etc.

Different ppl put different takes in different buckets.
What will happen if we get more data points is the fight will move from "medical experts weren't suppressed for viewpoints" to a complete relitigation of 2020-21's debates on what was & wasn't reasonably considered "dangerous disinfo" vs. legit medical disagreement.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(