Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the verified-replies dept
This week, both our top comments on the insightful side come from our post about helping Elon Musk speed run the content moderation learning curve. In first place, it’s Christenson responding to a “suggestion” that really appears to be a complaint about Techdirt’s own comment voting system:
You are going to have to add some kind of a modifier for the reputation of each voter, otherwise Koby and Chozen and his a*shole friends put 100s of downvotes on oddball’s innocuous or good post because s/he’s an oddball. That’s happened to people on Twitter.
Slashdot worked as long as the audience was primarily technical and voting in good faith, but broke down in the presence of trolls. Same as things like network news groups from back in the day.
In second place, it’s an anonymous reply to a comment listing some supposed examples of Twitter censorship:
Letting said former president do whatever the fuck he wants until he became a huge criminal liability is not censorship, it’s basic business sense.
Kicking the white supremacist views of the Babylon Bee off the platform isn’t censorship, either. The owners and slush fund payers of the Babylon Bee are free to call for the deaths of Democrats on their own site, assuming they like being monitored by the FBI. Also, their satire is not satire, but thinly-veiled insults and threats. I understand that satire is hard to pull off, but hatchet jobs aren’t it.
Moderation isn’t censorship, yes. Censorship involves a lot of things, like SLAPPing critics into silence, arresting critics, denying funding to research that doesn’t fit with the state’s narratove, watching the academics, blocking sites that reveal not so nice sides of the state narrative…
Private companies have not gone to the full extent they are capable of yet. Including hiring people to murder rivals and critics.
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start out with one more anonymous comment on that post, this time replying to a comment asking why we think Musk doesn’t know anything about content moderation:
I mean, there was the time he said he’d only block illegal stuff, like spam (which is mostly legal). That was kind of a gargantuan neon sign of a tip-off right there.
Or is your argument that, because Musk has spent billions on aerospace, automobiles, and electricity, that somehow obviously means he knows the first thing about content moderation? ‘Cause I hate to tell you this, but it doesn’t.
Next, it’s a comment from Anonymous Hero on our post debunking the Intercept’s bogus story about government policing of disinformation, responding to the assertion that the length of our response indicates the story was actually good:
You’re apparently unfamiliar with Brandolini’s Law: “The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than the amount required to produce it.”
Over on the funny side, our top two winners are once again from the post about speed running content moderation. In first place, it’s Michael Barclay noting the number of steps we outlined:
Dante only had **nine** circles of hell
Congratulations, you more than doubled Dante’s nine circles of hell.
In second place, it’s That One Guy with some evergreen copypasta that has won before, and will surely win again:
Conservative: I have been censored for my conservative views
Me: Holy shit! You were censored for wanting lower taxes?
Con: LOL no…no not those views
Me: So…deregulation?
Con: Haha no not those views either
Me: Which views, exactly?
Con: Oh, you know the ones(All credit to Twitter user @ndrew_lawrence.)
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with a comment from Flakbait on our post about cancel culture panic and the concept of “self-censorship”:
Not going there
I was going to make a comment about this post, but I won’t because I’m afraid of the backlash I’ll get.
Finally, it’s one last anonymous comment putting an addendum on the many steps of the content moderation speed run:
Go to Level 1. Do not pass go. Do not collect 44 billion dollars.
That’s all for this week, folks!


Comments on “Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt”
To be slightly fair to Musk
“Or is your argument that, because Musk has spent billions on aerospace, automobiles, and electricity, that somehow obviously means he knows the first thing about content moderation?”
No, but he didn’t know much about aerospace, automobiles or electricity when he started out, but he did know how to hire people who did.
Just a shame he doesn’t appear to be bringing this same strategy to social media moderation. Quite the opposite in fact.
Re:
Yeah, this time he fired /is firing the people who know. Must have gotten his alphabet out of skew.
Re: Re:
According to news reports, he is apparently now un-firing bunches of the fired people. If I were among the remaining employees, I would probably just quit. (I did that many, many years ago when my in-house programming job was suddenly going to change to external consulting.) Let Musk beg them to come back, and they should refuse until they get more pay and guaranteed better work conditions. Otherwise they’ll have a miserable time of it.
Re: Re: Re: 'Trust me,' said the blood covered wolf, 'I won't bite again'
Unless they are truly desperate for the job going back to work under someone who’s first move at the company was to fire a bunch of people and throw impossible demands on others strikes me as a really poor choice and one almost certain to bite them down the line when his ego gets in the way again.
Re:
Wow! I won! I won! (lol)
My tea leaves have Musk becoming noisily irrelevant except that he destroys Twitter and quite possibly takes Tesla with it. Musk is in a classic abuser pattern — alternating between nasty and nice, but the advertisers that used to pay Twitter’s bills are busy walking away and aren’t going to tolerate it — it’s all about “Brand Safety” and they have permanently lost trust.
Along comes the Fediverse — mastodon, sites like journa.host which I expect to see Mike Masnick on soon, and they are having lots of issues with scaling up to “national” (as in 100 million user) scale.
* Slow under the sudden influx of users
* Not built for massive parallelism
* Instance owner is on their own to set up hosting (so it’s at least website level effort) and has to pay for hosting.
* No good way to set up a little advertising with brand safety for the website. This is one that I think the big advertisers are ready to accept — that brand safety with advertising is a two-way street.
* Relatively unsophisticated (as in humans looking at reports) moderating tools, and relatively unsophisticated sorting tools for posts/toots/tweets and followers.
I think there are really two crux issues that will limit fediverse growth:
* Some way to monetize traffic, so if my instance gets popular, the bandwidth and moderation gets paid for.
* More sophisticated, crowdsourced, and automatic moderation. Masnick’s impossibility theorem applies here, but it’s an open question as to the maximum number of average humans per human moderator are possible without destroying the quality of moderation.
I want to see more experimentation in both spaces.
The old internet
its very interesting that Google has a set of the old newsgroups.
But not all of it, and mostly only sections to post to, and not the ones that we used to send files with.
Think that has anything to do with Liability and Piracy?
Re:
Traffic. Many sites didn’t carry the binaries newsgroups because of the size of the messages. Remember that bandwidth was several orders of magnitude less than we take for granted now, even for companies like Google, and those newsgroups didn’t have any searchable text content.
Typo
You misspelled my name, but I’ll let it slide because you think I’m funny.
Re:
I have now fixed this error, flagbait.
Re: Re:
Even though I’m not flagbait, I sure appreciate you correcting the typo, Mickey Masnik.
I’m sure all the Extremely Serious People who’ve been defending Musk have a very good explanation for why he spent today throwing a tantrum over Valerie Bertinelli changing the name on her account to “elon musk” and how his new plan to suspend anyone who makes fun of him, unless they explain the joke, is totally consistent with his previous insistence about his commitment to never “censor” any legal speech, actually.
Re:
Apparently, there’s a lot of people either taking the piss out of Elon or were hacked by cryptobots.
Can’t be too sure nowadays, I just assume they were hacked.
Re: Re:
If a cryptobot posts under Elon’s name…
How would anyone be able to tell the difference?
Re: Re: Re:
Has happened at least once!
Re: Erdogan would be proud
Nothing tests and exposes a person’s dedication to ‘free speech even if other people don’t like it’ like being on the receiving end of the result of that standard, and it sounds like he failed in spectacular fashion if something as simple as mocking him will be a bannable offense.
Re: Re:
Hey, remember that time one of the trolls posted under my name, and he didn’t get banned?
Almost as if this site has less restrictive rules than Twitter under Musk.
But that can’t be right. This site is a censorious hellscape and Musk is a true defender of free speech. The trolls told me so.
Babylon Bee is White Supremacy?
…You guys have gone so far off the deep end that you have lost your minds.
Re:
[Projects facts contrary to evidence]
Re:
You either last read the Babylon Bee before its owner sold it to some very fine people or are a disingenuous asshole.
In any case, the current Babylon Bee isn’t doing satire, but straight-up hatchet jobs insulting things like transgender rights.
If you’re into something that affirms your NeoNazi beliefs, feel free to visit the place. If you are merely misinformed, I apologize, but the current Babylon Bee simps for the Kochs and Murdoch.
Getting to officially call yourself chief twit … priceless!!!
Oh everything is going well.Drift Boss