If someone curious here is the line on GitHub:<p><a href="https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm/blob/7f90d0ca342b928b479b512ec51ac2c3821f5922/visibilitylib/src/main/scala/com/twitter/visibility/models/SpaceSafetyLabelType.scala#L39">https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm/blob/7f90d0ca342b92...</a><p>UPD: here is link to main branch without specific commit. Line is still there, it's not some fake or something:<p><a href="https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm/blob/main/visibilitylib/src/main/scala/com/twitter/visibility/models/SpaceSafetyLabelType.scala#L39">https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm/blob/main/visibilit...</a>
It downvotes UkraineCrisis (not just Ukraine)<p>Considering the massive propaganda operations from both Russia/Ukraine, it's actually not a bad flag.<p>Sure Ukraine is the good guy, but if you think that Ukraine doesn't run propaganda, you are completely naive.
This article is very uninformative. What’s the evidence this “safety label” is being used in an improper way and not for example Russian state propaganda or some of the extremely violent war footage?
Was this algorithmic change made before Elon's purchase or afterwards? The article doesn't say.<p>Considering that the Ukraine conflict has been going on since 2014 it would be nice to get more info before bringing out the pitchforks.
Ukraine war is one of my major interests. Not long after the takeover I found it 10x harder to see the people I followed who tweeted about Ukraine.<p>One notable vignette: Elon Musk called the Crimean handover “Kruschev’s mistake”. That’s a very specific statement steeped in Russian revanchism.<p>* One has to know Crimea used to be part of Russia<p>* One has to know Kruschev handed it over to Ukraine in the 1950s for an anniversary<p>* One has to believe this was <i>wrong</i><p>* One has to ignore voting at Ukraine’s independence suggesting the inhabitants at the time wished to be part of Ukraine and not Russia<p>It suggests the comment was inspired through talking to a Russian revanchist. One would not get this interpretation from, say, Wikipedia.
Is this really surprising? Nation-state actors and their proxies on both sides are constantly trying to astroturf Twitter. It's particularly awkward since the Ukrainian side seems to have a more effective disinformation program (eg. NAFO, Snake Island, the Ghost of Kiev, etc). It would be politically dangerous to crack down hard on that type of disinformation though, so all Twitter can do is turn down the volume for the topic in general.
For those really interested in the actual techniques being employed:<p>Twitter repo + relevant visibility tweaking code at:
<a href="https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm/tree/main/visibilitylib/src/main/scala/com/twitter/visibility/rules">https://github.com/twitter/the-algorithm/tree/main/visibilit...</a><p>Still reading through it myself, but if I'm properly distilling the gist out of this, it seems they've implemented an "iptables for tweet visibility" through which the server sends instructions to the client to then run a rules engine against to drop tweets or specifically throttle engagement.<p>So... if I'm right, and this is the real kick in the teeth from my perspective; they aren't even doing the hard work on their side to sift through the datastream and drop things on their side. They're instead programming your hardware to do their gaslighting/censorship/filtering for them.<p>Dumb pipe for them, but you're left burning cycles on your phone/client/whatever to hide their material for them. Corollary being that with a sufficiently misbehaving client, one ought to be able to reconstitute an unfiltered stream to get a more accurate representation of the awfulness of those around you instead of only seeing what Twitter wants you to see.<p>It also means that server-side, there may actually be nothing preventing using a sufficiently misbehaving client from repurposing the Twitter backend as a Command & Control layer. In fact, one may even be able to compose several account provisioning/deprovisioning/visibility primitives to ensure no normal client would see anything, while the message nevertheless gets through. It's technically auditable, but if I put on my blacker hat; I miiiiight see a few ways to get up to some difficult to follow mischief if the system as posted is truly representative of what is there. May do dome net traffic analysis to see if I can figure out where the request is that would return the hypothetical ruleset to be consumed by the client. Not entirely convinced the engine is entirely client side, as that would have tipped their hand much longer ago I'd think. Not sure til I actually audit the full codebasr.<p>Yet another reason I've never quite been brave enough to pull the trigger on hosting a system like this for anyone but those I personally know and trust. After a certain point, probability goes to 1 that somepne is going to find a way to repurpose something nice no matter the level of good intention into something horrible. I like to think of it as a more abstract form of Rule34. If you build an information transfer system, someone will use it for something illegal somewhere.<p>Of course, even if I'm totally wrong, odds are that if I'm seeing the potential here, there is a smarter, less ethical version of me with a goatee that's already picked it apart and os likely actively exploiting it.
Instead of being a bastion of free speech it really seems like what goes at Twitter is all up to what is most pleasing to Elon at any given moment, hypocrisy at its finest. The implication of decisions like this could be lives lost and oppressive regimes defacto boosted.
Judging by the comments here, it would be easy to assume most of you are already in favor of war with Russia.<p>Russia is not "the good guy". Neither are we. Any action that promotes war between the two is an action that also promotes widespread death and destruction across the entire planet.<p>Maybe down-ranking Ukraine tweets have hushed the war drums to a degree, maybe not. But there is a justification that does not include supporting Russia.