there is some/broad consensus that we can do better than iptables these days
oh yeah i have no doubt about that. just wondering what a healthy timeline looks like for the transition.
i donāt follow it especially closely, but had the impression bpf is still in the maturing phase regarding vulnerabilities. hopefully that is at least in part a sign it is being actively inspected and hardened with this purpose in mind - and iām sure iptables still has many lurking vulns.
in summary, agree some form of transition is likely inevitable. wondering what the timeline will look like.
if it wasnāt their specific field (language) its not super surprising no official claims came from them about this. would be interesting to know if they made some offhand comments about it though.
its conceivable they noticed something, but never had the time/resources to bring in appropriate experts and go through the formal process.
i personally wouldnāt be especially surprised if they had SOME form of what we might approximate as a language. whether this particular research proves itā¦couldnāt say
depends how its done⦠if it was like āwe fucked up, pls donāt continue down this negative road because of our mistakesā*
that could be considered a form of pressure. and maybe not be considered colonialist� (what do you think if they said it that way?)
thereās about a billion other ways they might pressure, and it would be colonialist.
is it safe to assume its mostly the latter?
The consensus is: yes, platforming alt-right authoritarians like Trump leads to more harm, including more people radicalized, and more people silenced by abuse they and their followers dish out on such platforms.
i could certainly see how it might be worse, because they just statistically reach fewer people. and perhaps also because it helps establish a line for what constitutes being too obnoxious, so other people will tend to moderate themselves a bit too because they know we dislike this offensive attitude.
what worries me is weāre only seeing our side of that line, where we think its nice now because the problem has āgone awayā - and honestly it has been nicer lately lol.
but has it really gone away? or are we just more comfortable now because its happening behind a fence we canāt and donāt want to see past?
imo it seems a bit too early to call where all the harm is eventually going to land and take root. i imagine at this stage, although it could very well be true, calling it a consensus is pretty optimistic, unless thereās details iāve missed?
Yes he did, in the article he talks specifically about Trump.
i read the article, imo its not yet clear whether he singled trump out or journalists steered it that way. if he has general ban policies which trump doesnāt (yet) fall under, that is an entirely different conversation than if musk is specifically unbanning trump because he wants more people like trump in the world. if iām missing something or thereās a much more complete source out there letās know.
The problem is not that Company X decides to ban a person or platform a person. The problem is that such a decision by Company X has such gigantic consequences. And that comes directly from the fact that Twitter is a centralized walled-garden monopoly.
Think of it this way: if any e-mail provider (even Gmail) ābanned Trumpā, that would be way less of an āissueā. Why? Because there are many other mail servers he can go set up an account on. So this particular e-mail providerās decision is no longer ācensorshipā really, itās āI really donāt want to do business with that toxic personā.
And thatās where we need to get to with social media. Centralization is a danger to democracy.
100% agree with everything you said about centralized walled-garden monopolies. that was part of my point, who made twitter this central power to begin with? itās completely ridiculous.
do i want to live in a world where anyone using hate filled rhetoric like trump can reach as few people as possible? yes.
did i think banning any public figures on twitter was about as stupid as twitter having so much power in the first place? yes.
do people like trump do more harm with a live twitter account vs banning them which polarizes their followers even more which leads to more harm? i have no idea
as for musk, did he specifically personally single out trump for unbanning? if yes, that is very troubling.
or did he talk about having very few permbans and journalists asked about specific cases including trump, and musk said that case falls under the general reasons he already gave re. min permbans? if yes, we need to wait a bit longer to see where he really stands imo
i agree with everything you said. the clincher though i think is some of what this article talks about is a legit issue (big tech trying to takeover linux/opensource etc ¹).
the problem is the author seems to completely miss the fact that its a fucking insidious takeover attempt
¹ especially microsoft
yep, its ridiculous. and its only going to get worse