WikiLeaks threatens to start its own Twitter because of ‘cyber feudalism’ - Polidicks

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50754908]Alright, I'm personally not a fan of websites ran by rapist attention-seekers[/QUOTE] I guess you also like to burry your head in the sand and pretend Theres nothing wrong with the world. Rapist attention seekers, given the chance to expose all the horrid shit in the world should be silenced. You know, cause rape has so much to do with the website.

It seems someone doesn't know what feudalism is.

Surely this comes under 'censorship' rather than feudalism? Seems to be awful use of a historical term. I also find it funny that WikiLeaks of all things would consider getting into social media.

[QUOTE=TheJoey;50754616]just a reminder that feminist frequency is a part of the twitter safety council [url]https://blog.twitter.com/2016/announcing-the-twitter-trust-safety-council[/url][/QUOTE] Just the fact that they have such an Orwellian council should be a warning.

hey wikileaks there are things called terms of service or manners or being civil to your fellow man

[QUOTE=gokiyono;50754641]Keemstar and Leslie herself are two[/QUOTE] So you're saying Keemstar isn't banned because he's "left"? The guy who's a gigantic racist and Trump supporter? Okay. Milo was banned because he directly told his followers to attack Leslie, it doesn't help that Milo is also way bigger on Twitter than someone like Keem. Also Keem knows how to avoid getting banned on Twitter which is why he never goes whole hog (like Milo did on Lelise) on it and keeps his hatred to his youtube page and live stream. There's no leftist plot, tons of far right nut jobs are allowed to freely shitpost 24/7 and Twitter leaves them be, Milo was allowed to spew his shite for years for example. He went way too far with his harassment, way further than Lelise went and got shut down for it. It's that simple.

[QUOTE=Sableye;50754991]hey wikileaks there are things called terms of service or manners or being civil to your fellow man[/QUOTE] That's exactly what it's being discussed here. People like Leslie Jones deserve to be banned too.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;50755028]Milo was banned because he directly told his followers to attack Leslie[/QUOTE] Can we please see the proof of this? How did he get further than this [url]https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg/status/755218642674020352[/url] ?

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50755049]Not being able to leak anything if they filtered the files? What time constraint is there if they had it hacked? I dont think you know how leaks work. What part is derailing? Wikileaks does more harm than good and I support them being off twitter. They still run their own website.[/QUOTE] It isn't wikileaks that got kicked off twitter, it's that alt right nut job Milo Yiannopoulos who got kicked off. I honestly think it was more than just the Leslie Jones thing that got him kicked off.

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50754448]could wikileaks just maybe stop oh my god cyber feudalism. fucking hell. didn't even think the fevered paranoid idiocy of julian assange could come up with something so ridiculous[/QUOTE] Do you even know the entire purpose of WikiLeaks? It's about getting the truth about certain subjects out in the open. It's actual, real journalism. If you don't like that, you can go back to your fake news sites and let them cram trivial bullshit down your throat like they do with everyone else.

[QUOTE=carcarcargo;50755232]It isn't wikileaks that got kicked off twitter, it's that alt right nut job Milo Yiannopoulos who got kicked off. I honestly think it was more than just the Leslie Jones thing that got him kicked off.[/QUOTE] It's the fact that he keeps doing it that got him banned. He's gotten temp bans multiple times in the past afaik but keeps starting shit. Leslie definitely also acts like a shit sometimes but not nearly as consistently, or as high profile.

[QUOTE=elowin;50755389]It's the fact that he keeps doing it that got him banned. He's gotten temp bans multiple times in the past afaik but keeps starting shit. Leslie definitely also acts like a shit sometimes but not nearly as consistently, or as high profile.[/QUOTE] Yet ISIS supporters and the like exist on Twitter, no problem. Good thing they got rid of that crazy Milo, though, right?

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50755656]LMAO real journalism? Email database dumps aren't journalism. What Süddeutsche Zeitung (hint: mainstream newspaper) and other mainstream sites did with Panama is journalism. They got a database, they wasted countless manhours reading through it, they produced a news piece, compiling relevant information. Left out irrelevant trash or private material that had no purpose to be in the open. WikiLeaks is more invading of people's privacy than NSA.[/QUOTE] At least they're doing more than most mainstream media.

[QUOTE=elowin;50755389] Leslie definitely also acts like a shit sometimes but not nearly as consistently,[b] or as high profile.[/b][/QUOTE] Being high profile and/or knowing the right people shouldn't make you immune to the rules.

[QUOTE=Robman8908;50755501]Yet ISIS supporters and the like exist on Twitter, no problem. Good thing they got rid of that crazy Milo, though, right?[/QUOTE] They ban Isis accounts all the fucking time dude. Get your shit together before you start screeching. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitposting" - rilez))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50755656]LMAO real journalism? Email database dumps aren't journalism. What Süddeutsche Zeitung (hint: mainstream newspaper) and other mainstream sites did with Panama is journalism. They got a database, they wasted countless manhours reading through it, they produced a news piece, compiling relevant information. Left out irrelevant trash or private material that had no purpose to be in the open. [B]WikiLeaks is more invading of people's privacy than NSA[/B].[/QUOTE] Is that what we're calling governmental transparency, now? An invasion of privacy?

[QUOTE=Monkah;50756597]Is that what we're calling governmental transparency, now? An invasion of privacy?[/QUOTE] Sorry, but if I started working, for example, in the civil service or army, you shouldn't have the right to leak my personal emails and information. I don't think you'd be happy with that either. That's not 'transparency', that's a breathtaking invasion of privacy, yet the very same people who screech and have an aneurysm about an elected government collecting (but not publicly publishing!) data are perfectly happy with an unelected rapist hiding from the police leaking information with no filtering of personal details or concern for individuals at all.

[QUOTE=Streecer;50754607]oh i didn't see the part where leslie jones sent a personal army to attack other people Milo broke the rules (repeatedly I might add), he got banned. Pretending like this is some kind of evil leftist plot to suppress free speech is both hilarious and incredibly sad in equal measure.[/QUOTE] Uh, she sicked her fans on him too, and she did it first.

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50755656]LMAO real journalism? Email database dumps aren't journalism. What Süddeutsche Zeitung (hint: mainstream newspaper) and other mainstream sites did with Panama is journalism. They got a database, they wasted countless manhours reading through it, they produced a news piece, compiling relevant information. Left out irrelevant trash or private material that had no purpose to be in the open. [b]WikiLeaks is more invading of people's privacy than NSA.[/b][/QUOTE] Hahaha no. [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center]The NSA has a huge data center in Utah[/url] (and possibly others) that gathers everything from emails, text messages, and internet search history and browsing records to phone call information (and even records the calls themselves, not to mention warrantless eavesdropping that can be done during live conversations), video footage, credit and debit card transaction records, receipts, travel itineraries, etc. from tens of millions of Americans and many more people all around the world. And that's just one part of their greater surveillance program activities. In fact, [url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/]the NSA gathers so much data on us, its own people, that they have overwhelmed themselves and aren't even able to sort through all of it[/url] lol. They've gathered data of some sort or another from something like [b]four billion people[/b] worldwide, according to that guy (William Binney, who worked there as an intelligence officer in cryptography and mathematics for around 30 years; also worked for the Army Security Agency during Vietnam). The NSA currently is, has been for a long time now, and will continue to be at the rate things are going in this country the permanent, undisputed champion of privacy invasion. They've got WikiLeaks beat by a long shot. They've got every other agency in the world beat. [editline]22nd July 2016[/editline] I mean this is kind of a big deal. It's not anything new either. I'm surprised more people don't know about it or that they treat it like it's a conspiracy.

[QUOTE=Govna;50757048]Hahaha no. [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center]The NSA has a huge data center in Utah[/url] (and possibly others) that gathers everything from emails, text messages, and internet search history and browsing records to phone call information (and even records the calls themselves, not to mention warrantless eavesdropping that can be done during live conversations), video footage, credit and debit card transaction records, receipts, travel itineraries, etc. from tens of millions of Americans and many more people all around the world. And that's just one part of their greater surveillance program activities. In fact, [url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/]the NSA gathers so much data on us, its own people, that they have overwhelmed themselves and aren't even able to sort through all of it[/url] lol. They've gathered data of some sort or another from something like [b]four billion people[/b] worldwide, according to that guy (William Binney, who worked there as an intelligence officer in cryptography and mathematics for around 30 years; also worked for the Army Security Agency during Vietnam). The NSA currently is, has been for a long time now, and will continue to be at the rate things are going in this country the permanent, undisputed champion of privacy invasion. They've got WikiLeaks beat by a long shot. They've got every other agency in the world beat. [editline]22nd July 2016[/editline] I mean this is kind of a big deal. It's not anything new either. I'm surprised more people don't know about it or that they treat it like it's a conspiracy.[/QUOTE] Does the NSA indiscriminately publish everything they get on the Internet? No? Then they aren't as big an invasion of privacy.

I don't know, if people want there own twitter to spew garbage that's good for them. I like posting on FP for the this exact reason, the mods keep the riff raff out

[QUOTE=Govna;50757048]Hahaha no. [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Data_Center]The NSA has a huge data center in Utah[/url] (and possibly others) that gathers everything from emails, text messages, and internet search history and browsing records to phone call information (and even records the calls themselves, not to mention warrantless eavesdropping that can be done during live conversations), video footage, credit and debit card transaction records, receipts, travel itineraries, etc. from tens of millions of Americans and many more people all around the world. And that's just one part of their greater surveillance program activities. In fact, [url=http://www.zdnet.com/article/nsa-whistleblower-overwhelmed-with-data-ineffective/]the NSA gathers so much data on us, its own people, that they have overwhelmed themselves and aren't even able to sort through all of it[/url] lol. They've gathered data of some sort or another from something like [b]four billion people[/b] worldwide, according to that guy (William Binney, who worked there as an intelligence officer in cryptography and mathematics for around 30 years; also worked for the Army Security Agency during Vietnam). The NSA currently is, has been for a long time now, and will continue to be at the rate things are going in this country the permanent, undisputed champion of privacy invasion. They've got WikiLeaks beat by a long shot. They've got every other agency in the world beat. [editline]22nd July 2016[/editline] I mean this is kind of a big deal. It's not anything new either. I'm surprised more people don't know about it or that they treat it like it's a conspiracy.[/QUOTE] Publishing personal details of civil servants is totally a breach of privacy, most of those people probably don't even have anything to do with Erdogan's shenanigans

[QUOTE=Trebgarta;50757091]Incomparable, NSA data center isnt available for public access. I'd argue not even their employees see the data unless it is "relevant", they have to use some automation for that bulk of data. If only Wikileaks used some automation, filters....[/QUOTE] Privacy invasion is always determined by collection, not distribution. If we were to follow your logic, a peeping tom isn't invading anyone's privacy as long as he doesn't record and distribute. The act of the NSA collecting data from people who don't want their data collected is just as much a privacy invasion as wikileaks collecting the emails.

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;50757212]Privacy invasion is always determined by collection, not distribution. If we were to follow your logic, a peeping tom isn't invading anyone's privacy as long as he doesn't record and distribute. The act of the NSA collecting data from people who don't want their data collected is just as much a privacy invasion as wikileaks collecting the emails.[/QUOTE] Both are privacy invasions. One is worse (Wikileaks). I would rather a peeping tom who only saw it himself than someone who distributed it across the world. And secondly, one is a government with a democratic mandate, the other is a random organisation with no accountability, no transparency (ironically) with a raging narcissist and possible rapist at the head. One has been entrusted the right to actions such as these by the people which elected it, the other has not.

Wikileaks is kinda shitty in that their methodology is incredibly lazy/ potentially dangerous. Their shotgun approach to releasing data is going to lead to a state secret that needed to be kept secret being released one day. Something the enemies of that state should not know at all. Their signal to noise ratio is fucking absurd, as rather than actually do the work to filter out the junk conversations between individuals, they're just throwing it all out there and hoping someone else will do the work for them.

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;50757230]Both are privacy invasions. One is worse (Wikileaks). I would rather a peeping tom who only saw it himself than someone who distributed it across the world.[/QUOTE] I'm not arguing which is worse. I'm just pointing out that BOTH the NSA and Wikileaks are in fact both invastions of privacy. [QUOTE]And secondly, one is a government with a democratic mandate, the other is a random organisation with no accountability, no transparency (ironically) with a raging narcissist and possible rapist at the head. One has been entrusted the right to actions such as these by the people which elected it, the other has not.[/QUOTE] Wait, which one is supposed to be the NSA and which one of these is supposed to be the DNC???

Its stupidly naive to think that Wikileaks is somehow better than then mainstream sources. In fact, it could manage to be worst because I'm not sure how well wikileakers fact-check compared to other places.

[QUOTE=Cliff2;50754744][IMG]https://sli.mg/veuwer2y5g.png[/IMG] Good friends with twitter trust and safety council.[/QUOTE] For those of you who don't know, The first number she gave out is the North Star Location Services hotline (or userline), the second number belongs to an actual person (looked at an archived tweet). I can't find any information no whether or not that's the CEO, but the number does belong to a person. But you can't' say for sure that this is actually a case of Twitter ignoring her tweet (or giving it a low ban time) because of bias for one reason, and two other possible scenarios. [B]This post is from May 2011.[/B] [URL="https://blog.twitter.com/2016/announcing-the-twitter-trust-safety-council"]The Twitter Trust and Safety Council was founded in February 2016.[/URL]. [B]How do you know that she wasn't banned?[/B] Doxxing is not always a permanent ban. Doxxers can get as low as a 24 hour account suspension depending on how major or minor it is. Moderation on twitter is extremely generous, and it's not limited to left or right. Just look at all the shit Milo said and got minor bans for (he said that people deserve harassment in the past, after someone complained that his followers were harassing this woman). He only had his verification sticker taken away. [B]How do you know that twitter moderation even saw the post?[/B] It's true that she made the post, but is there any evidence that Twitter even saw the tweet in the first place? Was it reported at the time? Someone can get away with a crime if no one calls the police.

[QUOTE=axelord157;50757272]Its stupidly naive to think that Wikileaks is somehow better than then mainstream sources. [B]In fact, it could manage to be worst because I'm not sure how well wikileakers fact-check compared to other places.[/B][/QUOTE] Well compare it to something like Fox News that throws around crazy conspiracy theories about the religion of our own president and puts their own slant on the news, and other news networks that report pretty much the same shit but put a more "liberal" spin on it. Most reporters are just as bad.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;50755028]Milo was banned because he directly told his followers to attack Leslie[/QUOTE] Please post proof of this, I haven't found it.