HN user

thrwyoilarticle

1,358 karma

A very long term throwaway, I object to too much identifiable personal information entropy on one account.

Posts1
Comments570
View on HN

I have not had a joke backfire that caused me to buy a company at several times its value. I have not fired people, cutting off their healthcare, during a recession. I have not made my family hate me. I have not lied repeatedly and without punishment in public. I have not been sued by the SEC, Twitter, and countless other parties.

Sick, imprisoned, travelling. There are plenty of reasons why someone can be temporarily unable to use the internet.

I suspect it 'knows better than you'. Self-curation leads to a boring niche whereas ignoring what you want in favour of what you linger on - even if you're lingering out of rage - leads to more engagement.

A live chart won't have much longevity if this is a temporary divergence. As much as I want it to be true, I think this post should be deleted until there are secondary sources. @dang

To answer your question, since the other replies are being disingenuous, it's a dog whistle for groups including 'liberals', left wingers, and - historically - Jewish people. This is why the OP comment makes the unsubstantiated claim that it's a method of coordinating an in-group's thought - as though agreeing with a left-wing bias Twitter is because of brainwashing and propaganda.

It's unsubstantiated because it's easily proven wrong. Twitter was home to Trump's presidential campaign. It's home to groups like ISIS, the Western output of the Kremlin, of the CCP, of Bolsonaro. Of Musk.

There is a point to be made about the changing role of Twitter. In my mind it is for some definition of 'elites' - but for expressing their views to their followers, not for coordinating. Sad that this opportunity to discuss such has been co-opted by conspiratorial rhetoric.

I think it falls under lying by omission. A company will want to know if you intend to hold another full time job. The applicant knows that, that's why they don't mention it. Avoiding multiply employed candidates risks unfair discrimination against the unicorn that can thrive in two roles - but companies already discriminate for more absurd reasons.

I find it vexing when publications treat 'official world record' as a synonym for 'Guinness world record'. They have no official capacity. They just have very good PR to be able to capture the term for themselves and for us to be able to ignore their novelty Christmas book associations and friendliness with despots.