Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Twitter Clampdown Could Impede Anonymous Tweets

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the 140-decent-characters dept.

Censorship 93

judgecorp writes "Twitter is going to clamp down on abuse and 'trolling' according to its CEO Dick Costolo. Actions could include hiding replies from users who do not have any followers or biographical information. The difficulty is that moves to stop trolling could also curtail the anonymous Tweets which have been useful for protest in repressive regimes."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512673)

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512823)

This has already been done. It's called 4chan. It's a good place to have anonymous discussions.

Posting as anonymous, because slashdot hates that website.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (3, Informative)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512933)

Thats cause its full of 12 year olds swapping porn and not much else

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512947)

"Thats cause its full of 12 year olds swapping porn and not much else"

They should swap a few apostrophes and periods.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (3, Funny)

myowntrueself (607117) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515581)

"Thats cause its full of 12 year olds swapping porn and not much else"

They should swap a few apostrophes and periods.

DO NOT start asking 4channers to 'swap periods'. It could get very icky very fast.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (1)

RockDoctor (15477) | more than 2 years ago | (#40522017)

Rule 34 has already taken effect.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513103)

0/10

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (3, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513177)

Actually, porn is restricted to the "Adult" boards, which are only a subsection of the site.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (3, Insightful)

Osgeld (1900440) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513723)

its over 50% of the site and by if you mean clicking an ok box its restricted I have a box of magic beans to sell you

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513887)

He means "restricted" as in "not allowed to post anywhere else".
Which means you don't have to see it if you don't want to look at it.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (5, Informative)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515053)

its over 50% of the site

There's 57 boards in total, of which only 17 are for +18.

It's not hard math.

by if you mean clicking an ok box its restricted I have a box of magic beans to sell you

I meant what I wrote: porn is restricted to the Adult boards.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (2)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515315)

marking them as adult boards is just so that it's easier for teens to find what they're looking for.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (0)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515927)

>marking them as adult boards is just so that it's easier for teens to find what they're looking for.

So somehow 4chan is a threat to teen morality on the internet?

Do you know where teens go to find their porn?

Bing. Bing has the absolute best porn search algorithm bar none. Whatever your fetish, Bing will find it. It's better than Google, especially when you go to the video search.

Whining about 4chan like you are means you need to read the book Innumeracy.

By the way, 80 percent of everyone online admits to looking at porn. The other 20 lie about it.

--
BMO

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (1)

DarwinSurvivor (1752106) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515481)

Ok, now compare the number of posts (or threads) in those categories and report to us what your "not hard math" tells you.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40515861)

You sound like a fanboi of 4chan. It's a sewer full of pederasts and pedophiles. Register an account as a 12yr old girl and post a lot of sexually precocious messages and see what happens.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#40520957)

I like the concept; I don't particularly like most boards, particularly /b/. Same as Freenet and other anonymous and pseudo-anonymous systems.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40518157)

"I meant what I wrote: porn is restricted to the Adult boards."

You, Sir, are an idiot. All the evidence one needs to spot a /b/ troll.

In the name of Science and All That Is Sane: begone, Vile Creature.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#40521003)

I don't go to /b/. The only boards I go to - and even those, it's rare - are /hr/, /lit/ and /wg/.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40514745)

Why in gods name would you try to converse in /b/? There's a bunch of other boards quite hostile to the posting of porn.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513381)

This has already been done. It's called 4chan. It's a good place to have anonymous discussions.

Posting as anonymous, because slashdot hates that website.

That's like going to Hooters for their menu.

I'm posting anonymous because I fear the revenge of the nerds.

Re:Meanwhile, in the sensible part of the Internet (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513823)

I fear the revenge of the nerds

If you can't beat em, join em.

They let Ogre join, so you have a real good chance.

Actually, so is twitter... (5, Interesting)

Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513611)

From the summary, it sounds like Twitter's efforts--purportedly to clamp down on abuse--can be easily bypassed by setting up two accounts instead of one, and entering a few fake fields.

So basically, it sounds like a way to artificially bump the number of accounts. So they may be looking to sell the company, or someone may be looking to artificially pad their resume.

Seems Obvious (5, Insightful)

Beardydog (716221) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512709)

Adding censorship tools could aid censorship? I would guess that what's considered trolling if it's done to a comgressperson's feed is considered noble dissent it's done to a dictator who has suddenly lost popularity in the west. Will Twitter have an emal address to which one can apply for the "noble dissent" waiver?

Re:Seems Obvious (2, Insightful)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512769)

Too bad we can't stop troll posts on Slashdot. Do you realize that instead of anonymous tweets, you can simply register a dummy account in 60 seconds and tweet whatever you want "anonymously" and that it has nothing to do with censorship whatsoever, nor would they ever EVER censor tweets based on political content.

Re:Seems Obvious (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512871)

and no one will see those tweets as the twitter search sucks.

Re:Seems Obvious (4, Insightful)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512883)

as the twitter search sucks.

You made a typo there, mate; you added two extra words there by mistake. Here, let me fix it for you: "as twitter sucks."

Re:Seems Obvious (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40516167)

Keep using that piece of shit Google+ crap from the Google creeps while I enjoy Twitter.

--
Sundar Pichai is the utter asshole whose incompetence has resulted in the shutdown of Google's Atlanta office. We don't forget!

Re:Seems Obvious (3, Insightful)

nospam007 (722110) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512989)

"you can simply register a dummy account in 60 seconds and tweet whatever you want "anonymously"

So you can create a dozen that follow each other in 12 minutes thereby circumventing this idiotic measure?

Re:Seems Obvious (1)

demachina (71715) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514311)

Costolo IS an idiot, and so is most of his team apparently. What did you expect from him?

I kind of thought Jack Dorsey had a clue. Either he really doesn't or he is getting outvoted by Costolo and the board.

I thought it was pure awesomness when Brett Taylor, Facebook's CTO, resigned almost precisely 2 weeks before Zuckerberg went ape shit and started changing everyones email addresses to facebook.com without their knowledge or permission. I imagine Brett's stock was vested and he still got rich on his way out the door, but people walking when companies do stupid shit is cool.

Re:Seems Obvious (3, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513015)

Considering from the moderators here that "troll" means "any post I don't agree with", you need to understand why this is such a bad idea. What is a troll, exactly? Concrete, objective definition please.

Re:Seems Obvious (5, Insightful)

sco08y (615665) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513493)

Considering from the moderators here that "troll" means "any post I don't agree with", you need to understand why this is such a bad idea. What is a troll, exactly? Concrete, objective definition please.

I remember back in the day on some smaller boards when trolling had a pretty specific meaning: it meant someone who was probably mentally disturbed who would routinely hurl invective at people on a board, try to set up arguments between people, and such.

Years ago on /., trolls were a specific group of people who just liked to fuck with people. They'd cook up certain irrelevant posts that would get a lot of angry comments, or they'd do stuff to wreck the layout of the page, or just post bizarre stories or whatever.

But now, trolling has lost its meaning because it's become ubiquitous... it's gotten to the point where someone says something stupid, you point it out, and they claim that they were trolling you. /. just needs to update its mod labels to reflect the way the terms have changed in meaning. But whether it's through "troll" or "flamebait", I know that people across the ideological divide from me are promoting people they agree with, and suppressing people who agree with me, so I'm forced to do the same to balance it out.

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40515849)

Real, artful trolling still exists. On the sports forums, it's banter, it's being a "wind-up merchant", it's still clever.

It's doesn't have to be stupid. It can even being 100% factual, but using stats is seen as low.

"I'd like to wish Brendan Rodgers all the best in his new role as Liverpool FC manager. He's needs a chance at managing a mid-table club before one of the bigger clubs come calling."

Artful.

It's seems like praise, but it's not.

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40516195)

Sooo... you're saying we should have a lengthy argument about what a troll really is and whether or not trolling has really changed over the years?

I'm getting some popcorn for this.

[Mod -1 Troll in 3... 2... 1... ;-)]

Re:Seems Obvious (4, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513505)

A troll is someone you may disagree with, but not always. I know people who troll and get all sorts of +5 Insightful. Those are troll that many agree with, but they are trolls none the less.

A troll is a stupid comment designed to illicit a emotional response. I know I've got plenty of "troll" mods for things I've said that weren't meant to be "troll" posts. SImply saying "Troll" meaning "I disagree" is in itself a troll.

Name Calling is trollish (___ is stupid). So are out of context random quotes (GNAA). Most Sexual comments (unless in a related topic) are troll posts. Any post that has a sole purpose of inciting a FLAME WAR is a troll (PCs Rule!!).

Re:Seems Obvious (2)

dargaud (518470) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515333)

Any post that has a sole purpose of inciting a FLAME WAR is a troll

Wouldn't that be flamebait ?

Re:Seems Obvious (2)

Bacon Bits (926911) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515865)

It is. At least, everywhere else I've ever been on the Internet in the past 20 odd years they're the same. Since flaming is universally frowned upon, however, the most common response to a troll is more trolling, rather than old-fashioned flaming.

SlashDot is the only place that actually tries to make a distinction -- and fails to, because it's never defined or not defined anyplace I know of.

Re:Seems Obvious (1)

davydagger (2566757) | more than 2 years ago | (#40517803)

flamebait is when its an honest but flamboyant opinion. e.g. I hate macs/linux/microsoft because.

A troll almost never believes the opinion he spews. Its a set up. its from the fishing term when you slowly motor a boat down the river with the line out, looking to agitate some fishies into biting your line.

A flamebaiter generally seeks to engage and fight the flamewar he starts. I troll pulls the pin, runs, mostly for the humor if it all. Trolling is considered a dark form of humor, its satire and farce packed into performance art combined with a joke which is always at someone's expense.

Re:Seems Obvious (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#40519767)

I always thought that "troll" was in reference to the dumb mythical creature that lives under a bridge.

Re:Seems Obvious (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 2 years ago | (#40519721)

Flamebait is a subset of Troll IMHO. But yeah that is Flamebait.

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40516043)

"I know people who troll and get all sorts of +5 Insightful" -

So do I - considering trolls here use MULTIPLE REGISTERED ACCOUNTS to do so (gaming the moderation system here on /. bogusly)... proof?

Ok:

barbara.hudson@unjava.com from http://slashdot.org/~Barbara%2C+not+Barbie [slashdot.org] = barbara.hudson@barbara-hudson.com from http://slashdot.org/~tomhudson [slashdot.org]

After all - we ALL know it goes on here... including hairyfeet, a respected enough regular poster member, who's WELL AWARE of that scum's tactics -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2872677&cid=40123423 [slashdot.org]

* Funniest part of all of that was that tomhudson/Barbara, not Barbie "disappeared" from May 21, 2012 onwards once he/she was exposed in it...

(That's a KNOWN /. troll who has multiple accounts for trolling others, modding herself up and her opponents down, and stalking them by ac posts which she admits to here and told others to join her in doing which is breaking the rules of this forum as well as laws. )

"Wait until he starts on another kick, then reply to him as an AC. It's the new meme." - by tomhudson (43916) on Sunday May 09 2010, @08:29PM (#32150544) Journal

from http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1646272&cid=32150544 [slashdot.org]

Others are aware of it going on also:

"It just takes one Ubuntu sympathizer or PR flack to minus-moderate any comment. Unfortunately, once PR agencies and so on started paying people to moderate online communities, and to have hundreds of accounts each, things changed." - by Bruce Perens (3872) on Friday July 30, @03:55PM (#33089192) Homepage Journal

SOURCE -> http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1738364&cid=33089192 [slashdot.org]

---

Lastly, there's also entire GROUPS practicing it as well:

This really bothered me, don't know about the rest of you:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/16/945768/-UPDATED:-The-HB-Gary-Email-That-Should-Concern-Us-All [dailykos.com]

PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS:

"According to an embedded MS Word document found in one of the HBGary emails, it involves creating an army of sockpuppets, with sophisticated "persona management" software that allows a small team of only a few people to appear to be many, while keeping the personas from accidentally cross-contaminating each other. Then, to top it off, the team can actually automate some functions so one persona can appear to be an entire Brooks Brothers riot online... And all of this is for the purposes of infiltration, data mining, and (here's the one that really worries me) ganging up on bloggers, commenters and otherwise "real" people to smear enemies and distort the truth... "

and

"They are talking about creating the illusion of consensus. And consensus is a powerful persuader... And another thing, this is just one little company of assholes. I can't believe there aren't others doing this already. From oil companies, political campaigns, PR firms, you name it. Public opinion means big bucks. And let's face it, what these guys are talking about is easy."

and

"To the extent that the propaganda technique known as "Bandwagon" is an effective form of persuasion, which it definitely is, the ability for a few people to infiltrate a blog or social media site and appear to be many people, all taking one position in a debate, all agreeing, for example, that so and so is not credible, or a crook, is an incredibly powerful weapon."

---

* There you are...

APK

P.S.=> There's always going to be weasels who *think* they're "smart", until someone catches them red-handed, then like Barb/tom above? They take off!

(Not really - considering that "type" (scumbags online) just moved on to using one of the other TONS of registered accounts they doubtless have to do it even more)... apk

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40516565)

I bet using a good hosts file would alleviate all these problems.

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513633)

Netcraft confirms that Dunbal is a fag. It directly lead to the death of Stephen King. I have poured hot grits down my pants. Thank you.

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY?
Are you a NIGGER?
Are you a GAY NIGGER?

If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy. All you have to do is join the official GNAA IRC channel #GNAA on irc.hardchats.com. We look forward to seeing you!

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40524369)

stuff off you prick

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512919)

considered noble dissent it's done to a dictator who has suddenly lost popularity in the west.

Incorrect. It's considered noble dissent according to the opinion of whoever is talking, regardless of what country or part of the world they are in.

Slashdot needs to do something about these crafty Troll posts getting marked up at +5 Insightful.

Twit Fitlers seem obvoious (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513249)

If the owners of a private technology like Twitter decide they should do something about the 'abuse' of their system, so be it. Hopefully they aren't hobbling its usefulness. I'm sure they're aware of the problem.

Perhaps it's better to allow users the ability to set their own levels of counter-community communications, and let the trolls continue to inhabit the dark spaces under the bridge. We all know they're there, and they need a place to lurk, otherwise they'll be tempted to come out into the light where they will surely shrivel under the scrutiny.

Maybe that's a better way to ensure civil behavior, if that's what you really want, start a 'troll tracker' and see what you can do to out the bastids!

Just remember, when you try to build a more fool-proof system, you are asking for nature to counter your efforts with a better fool.

Personally, I'd much rather be free of commercial solicitations than worry about the occasional troll.

Re:Seems Obvious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513383)

> Adding censorship tools could aid censorship?

Yes, just like adding anti-piracy tools could hinder piracy.

Oh wait....

"useful for protest in repressive regimes" (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512711)

aka "useful when the west sees the chance of insurrection and wants to ramp up the propaganda so it can install a new reactionary and cooperative government".

Revolutions don't happen on Twitter, no matter how much the lazy want to think they're suddenly enfranchised. Revolutions only happen in the corridors of power and, more rarely, on the street.

Re:"useful for protest in repressive regimes" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512799)

Frequently the media stokes the flames, and the media pays an absurd amount of attention to Twitter.

Re:"useful for protest in repressive regimes" (1)

Zorque (894011) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513635)

I wonder what a good way to organize one of those street revolutions would be in this modern age. It would preferably be online, and of course it would have to allow anonymity. Maybe a service which allows people to subscribe to and receive updates from others. Perhaps it could even be updated via SMS! Somebody ought to create a service like that.

Re:"useful for protest in repressive regimes" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40514571)

I wonder what a good way to organize one of those street revolutions would be in this modern age. It would preferably be online, and of course it would have to allow anonymity. Maybe a service which allows people to subscribe to and receive updates from others. Perhaps it could even be updated via SMS! Somebody ought to create a service like that.

It needs to be realtime because....? The only good answers to that question are also justifications for wiretapping the hell out of it.

What's wrong with stapling posters to telephone poles and graffiti? With some of you people it's like nothing can be done without the Internet, it's sickening.

Re:"useful for protest in repressive regimes" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40515943)

Street revolutions don't just happen because a bunch of bored teens and single twenty-somethings organise a party on Twitter, you dipshit. Otherwise every time a bunch of kids got angry about something there's be a a regime change.

What do you think is the first thing that would happen to telecoms services if the US genuinely felt its government was under threat?

Ain't Nobody's Business (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512721)

Twitter is a private enterprise, not a public service. They have every right to decide what they will publish.

Re:Ain't Nobody's Business (5, Insightful)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512877)

But people do have the right to voice their displeasure and hope for (or start) a new service that does not have these flaws.

Re:Ain't Nobody's Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40515571)

identi.ca [identi.ca] has been around for years if you want an alternative to Twitter, no need to to hope or wait for it to start.

Re:Ain't Nobody's Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40515631)

There are alternatives to Twitter like identi.ca.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_microblogging_services

Re:Ain't Nobody's Business (4, Insightful)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512917)

Twitter is a private enterprise, not a public service. They have every right to decide what they will publish.

While legally there is some truth here, this is quite possibly the most pointless thing ever said about Twitter.

In case you were new to this whole Twitter thing and how it works, "Ain't Nobody's Business" is in the business of making every damn thing everyone's business, via a public service that is free to use by anyone.

One can argue the legalities of private vs. public all damn day long, but there is no denying what Twitter is, or more importantly, what people have come to expect from Twitter, and censorship isn't one of them.

I don't predict a good outcome from this. This policy may stop trolling alright, but Twitter dying a horrible death due to censorship probably wasn't the troll solution they were going for.

Re:Ain't Nobody's Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40515351)

There might be a problem with people using Twitter as if it were a public service, but that's the users' problem, not Twitter's. It doesn't mean whiney, entitled adolescents are justified in crying "cernshorship" when they're not allowed to use Twitter's servers and bandwidth to hurl racial epithets anonymously.

it wasn't your intention (4, Interesting)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514797)

but you disproved your point deeply by saying that

among a certain set, it is attractive to privatize everything

of course, in industries with a network effect (electricity, cable, telephone) and huge startup costs (power plants, car manufacturing) the effect is that a few large players dominate, an oligarchy. this is true of google and twitter and facebook as well

an oligarchy is not the same thing as a free market where consumers can easily and freely switch providers

this being true, there is no easy and obvious alternative. if i dislike the sandwich my deli made me, i can walk down a block to another deli. but there is no other twitter. well, there is, but, the network effect being what it is, it's like saying i'm going to drop verizon and take up cardboard cups on strings

so, in response to your comment, i say this: for fields dominated by a few large players, the government has the right, in your name, to regulate those players as if they were part of your government, and that it is not at all illogical to say that rights you hold your government to, such as free speech, be imposed on the private enterprise, because it is, after all, basically serving a public interest with no real competitors

you can't have it both ways: either the situation is truly like a free market, or it is like a government service. you can't point at an oligarchy and a monopoly and say the rules of walking down the street to another deli applies. there are no other choices, it's not really a free market

just because you privatized a service to a few huge players is not the same thing as a free market. you're just playing silly games because you believe capitalism is some sort of religion that answers all things, when it clearly doesn't

Re:it wasn't your intention (1)

uninformedLuddite (1334899) | more than 2 years ago | (#40524405)

it's like saying i'm going to drop verizon and take up cardboard cups on strings

Why does you wanting faster downloads factor into this?

about time (2)

chentiangemalc (1710624) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512725)

I don't know how serious this threat is about "curtailing the anonymous Tweets which have been useful for protest in repressive regimes" But what twitter does need to block is the high amount of spam that is all so predictable...I can't believe twitter has not yet fixed it as the algorithm seems to be so simple to get rid of vast majority of it: 1) A person I do not follow "mentions me" i.e. Free iPhone here @chentiangemalc 2) This person has 0 followers, and usually also does not follow anyone else 3) They tweet this same message to 100s of people If a person wants to make "anonymous Tweets" or spam messages to themselves without mentions, then no problem for me. I can't believe though twitter has yet failed to block this kind of spam message.

Re:about time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512827)

1. I "mention" people who don't follow me all the time. It's irrelevant. The "free iphone here" bit is the relevant part.
2. So they change it. Now they've got spam bots registering and following 100's of their own accounts instead of just one.
3. This is what needs to stop. There is no context in which it is necessary for twitter to allow someone to tweet the same message to 100s of people, because if any business or group of individuals have that need, they can simply follow the person making a single message.

Re:about time (1)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513169)

You are right in that the system is inherently wrong, but instead of fixing they just try to patch it.

You must be (THIS) popular to post (4, Insightful)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512807)

The example given is ridiculous on its face. Biographical information can easily be faked-- a lot of the bots I've encountered swipe photos from Facebook and personals sites. Requiring a certain number of people to follow you, before you can... what? The only people this really hurts are newbies to the service. If you can automate creating an account, you can automate getting accounts to follow one another.

Re:You must be (THIS) popular to post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513739)

Just use this guy's [wikipedia.org] information.

Implants Will Be the Norm! CIA KISSES! xoxoxo (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512821)

Implants Will Be the Norm

Regarding:

Google 'Project Glass'
- http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/12/07/01/0553247/wearable-computing-will-be-the-norm-says-google-glass-team [slashdot.org]

This technology reminds me of the ST:TNG episode, "The Game":

- http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/The_Game_(episode) [memory-alpha.org]

"Wesley Crusher visits the Enterprise only to see everyone behaving strangely on account of an addictive, mind-controlling game."

IMO this is part of the march, or 'slow boiling frog' dance towards The Mark Of The Beast. Gradually, 'THEY' (see George Carlin's videos on YouTube about 'our owners' and 'education') will lead us to a mandatory chip implant and a a possible global hive mind.

It shouldn't surprise anyone:

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKULTRA [wikipedia.org]
- Google: The Mind Has No Firewall (military article)
- http://mindjustice.org/ [mindjustice.org]
- thehiddenevil.com
- Wikipedia: Look up the various 'PROJECTS' other than MKULTRA, there are many, like Project Paperclip.

%

Memorable quotes for Looker (1981) | http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082677/quotes [imdb.com]

âoeJohn Reston: Television can control public opinion more effectively than armies of secret police, because television is entirely voluntary. The American government forces our children to attend school, but nobody forces them to watch T.V. Americans of all ages *submit* to television. Television is the American ideal. Persuasion without coercion. Nobody makes us watch. Who could have predicted that a *free* people would voluntarily spend one fifth of their lives sitting in front of a *box* with pictures? Fifteen years sitting in prison is punishment. But 15 years sitting in front of a television set is entertainment. And the average American now spends more than one and a half years of his life just watching television commercials. Fifty minutes, every day of his life, watching commercials. Now, thatâ(TM)s power. â

%

âoeThe United States has itâ(TM)s own propaganda, but itâ(TM)s very effective because people donâ(TM)t realize that itâ(TM)s propaganda. And itâ(TM)s subtle, but itâ(TM)s actually a much stronger propaganda machine than the Nazis had but itâ(TM)s funded in a different way. With the Nazis it was funded by the government, but in the United States, itâ(TM)s funded by corporations and corporations they only want things to happen that will make people want to buy stuff. So whatever that is, then that is considered okay and good, but that doesnâ(TM)t necessarily mean it really serves peopleâ(TM)s thinking â" it can stupify and make not very good things happen.â
â" Crispin Glover: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000417/bio [imdb.com]

%

âoeWeâ(TM)ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.â â" William Casey, CIA Director

%

âoeItâ(TM)s only logical to assume that conspiracies are everywhere, because thatâ(TM)s what people do. They conspire. If you canâ(TM)t get the message, get the man.â â" Mel Gibson

%

[1967] Jim Garrison Interview âoeIn a very real and terrifying sense, our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society. Of course, you canâ(TM)t spot this trend to fascism by casually looking around. You canâ(TM)t look for such familiar signs as the swastika, because they wonâ(TM)t be there. We wonâ(TM)t build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line. Weâ(TM)re not going to wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves in gray uniforms goose-stepping off to work. But this isnâ(TM)t the test. The test is: What happens to the individual who dissents? In Nazi Germany, he was physically destroyed; here, the process is more subtle, but the end results can be the same. Iâ(TM)ve learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dreamworld America I once believed in. The imperatives of the population explosion, which almost inevitably will lessen our belief in the sanctity of the individual human life, combined with the awesome power of the CIA and the defense establishment, seem destined to seal the fate of the America I knew as a child and bring us into a new Orwellian world where the citizen exists for the state and where raw power justifies any and every immoral act. Iâ(TM)ve always had a kind of knee-jerk trust in my Governmentâ(TM)s basic integrity, whatever political blunders it may make. But Iâ(TM)ve come to realize that in Washington, deceiving and manipulating the public are viewed by some as the natural prerogatives of office. Huey Long once said, âoeFascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.â Iâ(TM)m afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.â

%

"The game is rigged and nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care!" - George Carlin

%

"From 1950 to 1962, the C.I.A. ran a massive research project, a veritable Manhattan Project of the mind, spending over $1 billion a year to crack the code of human consciousness, from both mass persuasion and the use of coercion in individual interrogation." - Professor Alfred McCoy, author of A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation, from the Cold War to the War on Terror. This quote is from Prof. McCoy's interview with Democracy Now on February 17, 2006.

%

"Our brain is domineering when it comes to coping with reality. We sometimes see things not as they really are, sometimes invent categories that do not exist and sometimes fail to see things that are really there. There are people who have never seen or heard of an aircraft and will not be able to imagine it and a real airplane overhead will be distorted in their minds, creating alternative realities.

To recognize that what we call reality is only a consensus reality (only what we have agreed to call reality) is to recognize that we can perceive only what we can conceive. Captain Cook's ship was invisible to the Tahitians because they could not conceive of such a vessel. Joseph Pearce explains this best: "Man's mind mirrors a universe that mirrors man's mind."" - Bharati Sarkar, "Consciousness - Our third eye."

%

âoeSecrecy is the freedom tyrants dream of.â
â"â" Bill Moyers

%

âoeSecrecy, once accepted, becomes an addiction.â
â"â" Edward Teller

%

âoeThe best weapon of a dictatorship is secrecy, but the best weapon of a democracy should be the weapon of openness.â
â"â" Niels Bohr

%

âoeFor nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.â
â"â" Luke (ch 8, v. 17)

%

âoeThe very word âsecrecyâ(TM) is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.â
â"â" John F. Kennedy

%

CIA Head: We Will Spy On Americans Through Electrical Appliances

- http://www.infowars.com/cia-head-we-will-spy-on-americans-through-electrical-appliances/ [infowars.com]

Global information surveillance grid being constructed; willing Americans embrace gadgets used to spy on them

Steve Watson | Infowars.com | March 16, 2012

"CIA director David Petraeus has said that the rise of new âoesmartâ gadgets means that Americans are effectively bugging their own homes, saving US spy agencies a job when it identifies any âoepersons of interestâ.

Speaking at a summit for In-Q-Tel, the CIAâ(TM)s technology investment operation, Petraeus made the comments when discussing new technologies which aim to add processors and web connections to previously âdumbâ(TM) home appliances such as fridges, ovens and lighting systems.

Wired reports the details via its Danger Room Blog:

âoeâTransformationalâ(TM) is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies,â Petraeus enthused, âoeparticularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft.â

âoeItems of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters â" all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing,â Petraeus said.

âoethe latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing.â the CIA head added.

Petraeus also stated that such devices within the home âoechange our notions of secrecyâ.

Petraeusâ(TM) comments come in the same week that one of the biggest microchip companies in the world, ARM, unveiled new processors that are designed to give practically every household appliance an internet connection, in order that they can be remote controlled and operate in tandem with applications.

ARM describes the concept as an âoeinternet of thingsâ.

Where will all the information from such devices be sent and analyzed? It can be no coincidence that the NSA is currently building a monolithic heavily fortified $2 billion facility deep in the Utah desert and surrounded by mountains. The facility is set to go fully live in September 2013.

âoeThe Utah data center is the centerpiece of the Global Information Grid, a military project that will handle yottabytes of data, an amount so huge that there is no other data unit after it.â reports Gizmodo.

âoeThis centerâ"with every listening post, spy satellite and NSA datacenter connected to it, will make the NSA the most powerful spy agency in the world.â

Wired reports that the incoming data is being mined by plugging into telecommunications companiesâ(TM) switches, essentially the same method the NSA infamously uses for warrantless wiretapping of domestic communications, as exposed six years ago.

Former intelligence analyst turned best selling author James Bamford, has penned a lengthy piece on the NSA facility and warns âoeIt is, in some measure, the realization of the âtotal information awarenessâ(TM) program created during the first term of the Bush administrationâ"an effort that was killed by Congress in 2003 after it caused an outcry over its potential for invading Americansâ(TM) privacy.â" - © 2012 Infowars.com

- http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/ [wired.com]
- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17345934 [bbc.co.uk]
- http://gizmodo.com/5893869/this-is-the-most-powerful-spy-center-in-the-world [gizmodo.com]
- http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1 [wired.com]
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy [wikipedia.org]
- http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/ [wired.com]

Or people could just chose not be ouraged (2)

gelfling (6534) | more than 2 years ago | (#40512825)

Because the idea that world has been built for you personally so as to never give you an uncomfortable moment is a bit silly.

Sneak peak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512835)

I sure hope this troll stays around:

https://twitter.com/#!/stealthmountain

So web 3.0 is here? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40512863)

Since we didn't like what some individuals were saying in our "web 2.0" model we are now turning it into solely a broadcast medium for celebrities to promote their projects and plug their endorsements, and the "popular" to spew their random 140 character thought fragments that nobody with a brain cares about in the first place.

What could go wrong?

A simple spam filter would be nice (4, Insightful)

JazzXP (770338) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513001)

I just wish they'd block tweets that are directed straight at me, with a shortened link in them, from people I've never interacted with before.

Irrelevancy (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513285)

it shall enter a time of.

Can we please drop this concept of "YRO"? (4, Interesting)

Alimony Pakhdan (1855364) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513479)

Some time ago some sensible folks pointed out that there is no such thing as "cyber crime" just "crime". For the very same reasons, there really is no such thing as "your rights online", just "your rights" and I'd like to remind everyone that the concept of "rights" is not the same everywhere.

People same Everywhere, Rights same Everywhere (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40514657)

What is different, is what Rights the local gang with the monopoly on violence chooses to respect.

Your 'Concept of Rights' is based on the assumption that Governments Grant Rights.

Your concept of Rights believes that rights only exist if they are codified into Laws.

This is a flawed premise. Throw it out. Start again.

Here, take a big hit of this, now come on, another. That's it!

Now,put this Album on.

Exit the matrix.

You have much to ponder and much to learn.

Free yourself from the paradigm created by others to control you.

One day, far in the future, we will meet again and I will ask you what you have learned.

Re:People same Everywhere, Rights same Everywhere (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514703)

Rights are granted by the society you live in. Sometimes they are made into laws by the representatives of that society.

"Natural" rights are a ridiculous concept used as propaganda by certain politically active philosophers and revolutionaries. They don't stand up to logical examination.

Re:Can we please drop this concept of "YRO"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40523511)

Some time ago some sensible folks pointed out that there is no such thing as "cyber crime" just "crime". For the very same reasons, there really is no such thing as "your rights online", just "your rights" and I'd like to remind everyone that the concept of "rights" is not the same everywhere.

Keep dreaming!

What was "cyber crime" before (for example in the US) the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act [wikipedia.org] ??

You may have some legal rights that include "... on a computer" of some sort, but I'd REALLY like to hear your argument for having any sort of natural right "... on a computer."

You can't just map laws to virtual constructs any way you wish, and to argue for some natural rights extended in the same manner would take a whole heck of a lot more than your one sentence on /. telling us so.

With only 140 characters... (1)

whargoul (932206) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513663)

...how is Twitter still relevant? Personally I think it makes a great single sign on service, but this whole 140 character limit they've imposed on themselves has rendered them useless for any kind of substantial communication IMO.

Re:With only 140 characters... (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 2 years ago | (#40513845)

Didn't Twitter originate as an SMS gateway, whose messages have a 140 byte limit?

Re:With only 140 characters... (1)

b5bartender (2175066) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514397)

I think you've missed the point somewhat.. the character limit has its benefits (enforces brevity), but that's not what I'd consider the strength of Twitter these days--since the addition of the streaming API, Twitter has become an invaluable resource for gathering information in real time.

Re:With only 140 characters... (1)

jaymemaurice (2024752) | more than 2 years ago | (#40523771)

Slashdot has a limit on the number of characters in your sig too... it's 20 less then twitter even.

Prevents Swamping of protests (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40513965)

The trick repressive regimes use against anonymous comments is swamping, they flood boards and twitter with comments from paid supporters (usually young naive army men misled by clever manipulative old generals). Suppressing actual protests from ever being read by swamping them with thousands or tens of thousands of fake pro-repressive regime lies.

So this filtering is as likely to have a positive effect on that as a negative effect.

The fix for Egypt, BTW, is to get as many of the democratically elected supporters into the Egyptian army, thus undermining the generals control of the country.

Twitter is no friend of freedom (1)

LS (57954) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514353)

Despite the fact that twitter played a part in several "revolutions", twitter never had freedom in its DNA. Just look at some of their actions:

Country specific censorship controls [thinkdigit.com]

Purchase and subsequent shutdown of Whispercore, an android build used for secure communications in Egypt [itnews.com.au]

I also have a friend that was an organizer for OWS in NY during its inception, and he claimed that several of his tweets were removed.

LS

Re:Twitter is no friend of freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40514593)

Your friend, like most nutters, likely confused tweets failing to post with being deleted. Twitter ACTUALLY deleting tweets would be a much bigger deal than some spoiled first world hippies.

Re:Twitter is no friend of freedom (1)

LS (57954) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514785)

And you apparently are a douche. You ignore the first two links, then anonymously trash someone with tired epithets.

tweet, tweet! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40514609)

only trolls protest represive regimes

He's just sour (1)

whois (27479) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514639)

You guys have had your fun. Stop tweeting dick jokes at him and he'll turn the internet back on.

The difficulty is ... (1)

SSpade (549608) | more than 2 years ago | (#40514751)

The difficulty is that moves to stop the anonymous Tweets which have been useful for protest in repressive regimes could also curtail trolling.

could? isn't that the goal? (1)

nazsco (695026) | more than 2 years ago | (#40515163)

Also, it's tweeter. Who the fuck care besides journalists that try to validate that shit since forever but got all of then locked in a circle jerk.

A nice tight twitter, nice... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40516225)

I just love a nice tight twitter.

But I'm not trolling ... (1)

Skaperen (1481527) | more than 2 years ago | (#40516617)

I've said that 1000 times already.

Twitter useless as medium of free speech (1)

PSdiE (643639) | more than 2 years ago | (#40517497)

I set up @NetFreeUK a month or so ago and built up a following by retweeting and commenting on stories related to freedom of speech, individual privacy, dangerous Big Media legislation like ACTA etc. I've been meticulous in sticking to the rules - not spamming, replying politely to those with contradictory views etc .. but my account is currently suspended, as of several days ago.

I've appealed to Twitter, asking them to verify from my history that I've not broken any rules, heard nothing back after nearly a week. I'm assuming someone took a dislike to my views (e.g., defending Assange) and reported my account to silence it. If it's happened to me in this manner, I can't be the first.

So much for Twitter being an effective medium of free speech. Dissenters using it to share knowledge within repressive regimes like Syria can be easily silenced simply by officials reporting their account for "trolling" or similar - Twitter don't seem to bother verifying complaints. That could have disastrous IRL consequences. In my case it's just been a very effective method of putting me off advocating some important causes.

Anyone else run into the same problem with Twitter? Any advice on restoring a maliciously suspended AC?

about the twitter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40518917)

well i don't want to publish my bio info there are people jsut ready to grab those info and use them just not putting my info in twitter doesn't mean i am a awfull person

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?