Terms of Service
Terms of Service typically refers to the contract or agreement between a user and a service provider. Almost every service on the internet has one.
On X
2017
We avoid the elephant in the room: it's reality itself which is in violation of @Twitter, @Patreon, @YouTube & @facebook's terms of service. https://t.co/E25MEi8Vjb
2018
A crazy theory on @jackâs apology to Candace Owens: The CEO as prisoner.
Thy: Jackâs been implementing a bad solution to the online policing of behavior that he himself detests b/c the demarcation problem for business-friendly digital speech code models remains as yet unsolved.
Conjecture: Until thereâs a major innovation in Machine Learning, every large mainstream open communication platform eventually develops epistemically inconsistent Terms Of Service (implemented selectively at that) regardless of intentions, simply due to selective pressures.
@johnrobb Machine Learning is playing two roles here. One is the obvious automation role. The second one is as âopaque all purpose scapegoatâ to blame for decisions. We humans may have to proudly lock themselves out.
RToS: Reverse Terms of Service.
Interesting gambit for a high profile dissident family.
Your âTerms of Serviceâ mean nothing to me if you reserve the right to apply them asymmetrically for nakedly political ends.
Iâd prefer you just wrote: âWe reserve the right to silence, harass & gaslight users on our platform at our sole discretion over political disagreements.â
@Plinz @BillmanThaddeus @KnowingBetterYT Joscha for the win.
Does Shakespeare violate your Terms of Service?
Does Mark Twain violate your Terms of Service?
Does the Constitution violate your Terms of Service?
Does Biology violate your Terms of Service?
Then take a deep breath. Let me break it to you gently:
The problem isn't Shakespeare.
It increasingly looks to me like weâre being intellectually softened for broad use of payment & financial processing as an extra-judicial layer of âbehavioral correctionâ (e.g. association, speech).
And if you donât like it, you can start your own financial system. #HelloCrypto
Because no one supports mass shooting or Neo-Nazis, maybe we will have a bunch of stories about how legitimately bad actors are successfully being hobbled by denying them access via Terms of Service & reporting financial activity.
That will then bleed to hobbling folks at will.
2019
Canât shake the feeling we all are being subjected to *totally* different Terms of Service.
I wasnât trying to get this tweet removed. Twitter tells me it is no longer available but not that it has been deleted. Then they sent me to a page for clarification that explained in some corporate speak the many different things that might explain its unavailability to me. Arg. https://t.co/4w9aioRoZh
Â
Now @twitter tells me that *I* in particular am not 'authorized' to see the tweet. Are others "like me" not fit for full twitter? It's not like I called for a violent felony to be perpetrated on others. I just made the mistake of talking ToS.
The speech rule book is fascinating. https://t.co/bE4k60TK3M
Â
Now the Barkin Tweet *is* available once again under a notice that proclaims: âThis Tweet Is no longer available. Learn Moreâ linking to a page that canât possibly explain the raw logical paradox.
I canât tell who sees what. This feels like a cult disconnecting us from reality. https://t.co/XSFP8ytOfy
Â
@IThinkBasic Never heard of that.
Ok! But the lyrics contain the *exact* same two word phrase that got Sargon kicked off @Patreon. So...
This was before the founder of âN-words With Attitudeâ (??) called out @billmaher. So, whatâs the plan to commemorate this song? Iâm straight outta ideas. Anyone want this?
@ziinjin @Patreon @billmaher Then letâs stop pretending that there are rules that are knowable. Letâs end the charade of Terms Of Service violations. I get context and intent. I donât get pretending there are simple knowable rules. That was the issue here.
@ToddWRoy1 @Patreon @billmaher You missed the point. I get the context issue. And for Sargon the context went his way and he was thrown off. That was the point. Context is being applied only selectively.
It would appear I missed an important memo from our friends at Google. They are going to start algorithmically burying content that doesnât violate their terms of service.
YouTube & Google constitute much of our market place of ideas. Is that a Free Market? An Open Market?
Okay @Google & @YouTube. We have elections coming up in 2020. Can you be HYPER-specific about what you mean by âdoesnât quite cross the lineâ as a decision boundary?? Can you describe this classifier in DETAIL given your relationship to civil society & democracy? We have all day.
âWeâll continue ... this year, including taking a closer look at how we can reduce the spread of content that comes close toâbut doesnât quite cross the line ofâviolating our Community Guidelines. To that end, weâll begin reducing recommendations of borderline content...â -Google
Who/what is Borderline content? Is that Falt Earthers & @benshapiro? What of people who think Lee Harvey Oswald might not have acted alone? Is that @JamesADamore or people who want to take anti-trust action against @Google? What about those who oppose H1bs you use as tampering?
I will be coming back to this old tweet repeatedly. A plan to reassert narrative control before 2020 was evident immediately after Trumpâs win shocked our institutional elite. âFake newsâ was itâs placeholder buying time to figure out how to end rivals to âauthoritative sources.â
Iâd say that old tweet wasnât too far off after all. We just had it dribbled in increment by increment with changes in âTerms of Serviceâ & the slow crushing push to numb our outrage from our institutional class, article by article, until we welcomed our own censorship w/ thanks.
@_mashjam_ Yes. We have infatuations who want to go back to the legacy narrative which I detest. We have people who have bought the Trump narrative which I detest.
What is supposed to happen is something new. Not MSM and not Trumpian. Right now itâs a war between two absurd camps.
Do not ignore this quoted tweet.
There are layers and layers with this. I think @jack is likely moves ahead here.
Donât let your frustrations with current Twitter and itâs Terms of Service or Trust & Safety issues blind you to what is likely to be the fate of social media.
Do you want to blow your own mind?
Ok. What if the future of social media is CEOs who donât want responsibilities that no one can possibly shoulder because the challenges are impossible? What if the CEOs lock themselves out of being able to influence what happens on platforms?
Iâm not saying this will become that. I am saying that we canât fully blame the CEOs for solving problems that have no solution & their best move may be a move to decentralized computing with all its potential nightmares and freedoms. Think about this. Itâs a đ weâve never seen.
2020
I am going to be increasingly *ignoring* various issues, campaigns & provocations on Twitter.
If you are determined to screenshot the fact that I blocked you, Iâm now much more happy to accommodate. We mere mortals with flaws have a right to be protected from our betters here.
I tried to engage before & do very little of this (e.g. Blocking or ignoring). But the danger to named individuals from the Platform, the bots, governments, law and mobs has nothing to do with free speech. It has to do with a tilted playing field encouraging personal destruction.
Further, Terms Of Service have concentrated *discretionary* enforcement w/ âTrust & Safetyâ.
So, I donât have a solution. I doubt Twitter does. Until they do, I will be using what exists: Block, Mute and Non-engagement as I, in my sole discretion, see fit until there is change.
I tried civility. I tried engagement. But this platform is engineered to allow all sorts of problems. One of them is anonymous networks of accounts/bots engaging named humans. Another is privacy based attacks. A third is bigoted intimidation. The controls are just insufficient.
So ends an era of general restraint. I failed to find a new way. So be it. If the platform changes meaningfully, Iâll try again.
Thanks.
@coreyjro Thanks Corey.
@McDO0M Thanks Sean.
@RisaSher I still believe it is worth trying with people. But not bots. Not paid foes. Not the destructive and implacable unwell. Not the anonymous. Etc
The platform is just too tilted towards destruction.
Unfortunately no one can be told what the D.I.S.C. is:
Terms of service
Superdelegates
Catch & Kill
Blue Ribbon Panel
Trust and Safety
Peer Review
Authoritative Sources
Non-Disparagment/Disclosure
Deboosting
Strategic Silence
Downranking
ML Fairness
No-Platform
Tin Foil Hat
Etc.
@samthewiz Yes. We would talk occasionally when I lived in cambridge.
@samthewiz It is his genius phrase.
But it is an idea common to all of the American Jewish left. He didnât invent it. We all believe it...or those of us who remember the past anyway.
Iâm interested in *directly* & *consciously* contradicting twitterâs terms of service prohibiting disagreeing w/ health authorities & governmental authorities where they are lying or giving dangerous information.
I claim masks work. @WHO is not to be trusted on matters of fact.
I encourage you all to be defiant on matters where authorities are self-evidently lying or deceiving the public about issues of fact to cover for their own *inability* to prepare for, analyze, respond to, or otherwise level with the populace about preparedness for this pandemic.
Our leaders put our medical workers in a terrible position by not having them supplied. Iâm not covering for our leaders by allowing them to bullshit us all that masks are unnecessary just because the leaders failed on PPE preparedness. Failure as a leader isnât a license to lie.
Feel free to report this tweet. It is time to BREAK the Terms of Service.
It is acceptable to say: âPlease donât hoard masks because we the authorities FAILED to take care of our health workers in harmâs way.â
@WHO canât say: âMasks are ineffective & unnecessary.â
- SlipTheDISC
I am deliberately posing here with actual âpotentially harmfulâ objects found in my home. I still have minor in the house.
Please @jack, let me know if Iâm violating Twitterâs Terms of Service as understood by your trusted Partners.
I am so disappointed in you. This is *wrong*. https://t.co/jqIXQtuNvC
Â
Vodka courtesy of artist âShane Balkowitschâ, an extraordinary American wet plate photographer from Bismarck, North Dakota. @balkowitsch https://t.co/nGdCQIqnqp
Â
Â
Â
Â
Dear Ms Bourgeois,
You do realize to what you are admitting? It wasnât âflaggedâ. It was *permanently* âdisabledâ by you with no warning & no possible appeal & zero information. And according to you it was âreviewedâ. So it wasnât automated. You are lying. What really happened?
You should never send that cancellation message to anyone ever. Even at NĂŒrnberg we acquitted three of the Nazi defendants. Youâre acting in front of an election as an Anti-American force posing as an American near-utility protected by barriers to entry. And lying. What happened?
Let me say this clearly as I work for a board member of your company. Iâm not speaking for Peter Thiel or Thiel Capital but as myself as a life long progressive & contrarian.
Your politics & technology are out of control in a lethal cocktail. We know who wants Bret cancelled.
It would be a pleasure to have them on my podcast. Because as a technical person myself, your explanations make no sense. You seem to have a political bias problem and find yourselves in a position to decide who may regulate you...by controlling our conversations.
Be well,
Eric
You want to get your engineers on a call to discuss Type I vs Type II errors? Why your Terms of Service and editorializing are so bizarre? How you canât find technical people to answer any questions in ways that make sense to technical outsiders more interested in the US than $$?
Bret is also suspended w/o explanation at @articlesofunity by Twitter for rejecting the two party duopoly to push for unity.
Your companies are making strikingly similar inexplicable errors revealing the bias on both your parts. And lying. What is this about? His Anti-Wokeness?
@RubinReport One day Dave.
What do I not see clearly that you are trying to show us?
@RubinReport Well keep trying to emphasize that we âjust donât get itâ in public.
Do you ever wonder why we donât just sign up for a ready made TPUSA conservative eco system? I mean thereâs money & Trump *has* done some great things. I get on w many conservatives & libertarians. Think Dave.
@RubinReport Or you could just keep trying to emphasize that you are farther ahead and that we are cognitively slower. Up to you.
Note: I donât do this to you.
@iwanttotalk_now @RubinReport Pretty sure I used the word âlyingâ about Facebook.
Keep it up Facebook. Iâm sure thisâll be restored soon enough...just have to get a candidate through.
You know how it is with systems that flag accounts. Donât over react. Just more errors. Thatâs all. Terms of service. Trust & Safety. Authoritative sources. Fact checking. Etc.
âHere at X we are fully committed to free speech. The diversity of ideas is in fact the very reason this company was founded. At the same time, we at X strive for diversity inclusion so that all users on our platform may have an optimal user experience sharing perspectives.â
âOf course it is never possible to please all users and our space is actually more ferociously competitive than our critics realize. However rather than fear competition, at X we welcome it and encourage those who think that this can be done better to launch their own companies.â
âWe believe that through a process we call âDynamic Best Practicesâ our adaptive policies meet the needs of all our users. That is why we launched our awareness campaign âFree Speech without Hate Speechâ with leading academics to share their research in advising our every move.â
âWe at X are proud of our commitment to both Trust and Safety. That is why we have worked with thought leaders from across a diverse group of authoritative & respected institutions to formulate dynamic Terms of Service to constantly adapt to our mission of diversity & inclusion.â
These concepts are being used to control our thoughts, bias our conversations, chill our speech even when it is not endangering anyone and simply discussing and weighing branches of *legitimate* decision trees of possibilities that Tech now insists we assign zero weight.
Sorry..
Of course there is no problem with protecting individuals from harm and abuse. The issue is that once Tech defines Fake News, Diversity, Inclusion, Equity, Hate Speech, etc to include methods making reality illegal, *any* inconvenient user can be removed, down ranked & deboosted.
This is undoubtedly coming from multiple sources. Some of it is common pressures producing common intellectually incoherent responses. But other parts of this are likely coming from quiet âWorking Groupsâ with report titles like âCoordinating Response to Hate Speech & Fake News.â
Now all that doesnât come from a company X. But it comes from the same place from which all the mindless corporate tech drivel they all produce originates. And all I had to do was get myself in the right frame of mind to write it. So I sat on a porcelain throne, and there it was.
âIn fact many donât realize that we actually work *with* our competitors across platforms, and even with our regulators to make sure that we can learn from their experiences and share our knowledge. Because in the end, at X we know that business is about serving you, the people.â
@FirearmsPB Thank you thank you.
I would like to thank my teachers.
@JaimeVelo I would put it differently. Merde. If you will.
2021
No one believes in your opaque Terms of Service. @TwitterSafety is artificially controlling our conversation determining who I can see & who I cannot.
Point Blank: You do *not* have the right to manipulate the US national conversation just because it takes place on your servers.
@jack, I am asking you as a friend and as a STEM PhD who has been responsible on your platform for over a decade to grant some heterodox tweeters academic freedom. Let some of be those who watch the watchers of your @TwitterSafety. We all need oversight of the oversight.
Dear @jack:
I believe I must repeatedly violate @vijaya & @TwitterSafety rules to be honest about official lies. I believe you/they are also manipulating my reach. I call for an end to the opaque manipulation of the national conversation: we have a right to know your algorithms.
The few of you who will be able to see this thread at the beginning: please retweet the lead tweet. My reach is being controlled in ways I cannot understand. Many fewer of you are being shown these tweets than were previously. But they must always show this to a subset of you. đ
NOTE: I am noticing how I seldom see tweets from my friends with large followings the way I used to unless I visit their timelines. Iâm noticing how much longer it now takes to grow a following on Twitter compared to other platforms. This is increasingly feeling like gaslighting: https://t.co/g4UpboG4U8
Â
@DontYaHatePants I agree with that. Some see too many others see too few. And it induces us to have to repeat ourselves. Obviously.
Itâs enough already.
The scientific method violates Twitters Terms of Service. CNN spreads vaccine hesitancy.
Can we stop forcing smart people to pretend that these vaccines are simply a slam dunk? Iâd like to hear *everything* Pfizer, Fauci, et al really know about what isnât working so well.
2022
No tech platform can live within its own terms of service.
When we are told âYou have violated our terms of service.â The correct response is: âYou have no terms of service.â
Every tech platform is violating its own terms of service. There are no terms of service. At all.
Â
You will learn more about the horrific attack on author Salman Rushdie searching on âÙŰ§ŰŻÛ Ù Ű·Ű±â than you will searching on âHadi Matarâ in English.
You will also learn more about the selective application of Twitterâs terms of service.
@ShehroseMia I don't speak Arabic or Farsi at all...so not pretending. I do plod through some of the orthography now and again.
I am increasingly seeing @twitter in a different light: as a company that is willfully physically endangering those that do not share the Revolutionary politics of its staff and management.
What if selective application of its capricious terms of service is precursor to murder?
Â
Why is open glorification of attempted murder & mayhem against an author by those mocking âfreedom of expressionâ all over TwitterâŠjust so long as it is not written in English and barely concealed with a Google Translate button? Am I wrong about this? It seems to be everywhere:
Â
Keep in mind that while this kind of posting is flowing everywhere around you on Twitter, the account you are reading now is heavily throttled.
Bottom Line: This isnât up to @twitter as âa private company that can do whatever it wantsâ. This is *facilitating* violence to come.
Â
Lastly, I want to say what should be obvious: many of the people most threatened by terror, are those standing up for freedom of expression from WITHIN the groups having a problem with totalizing ideology and terror. Search in Farsi/Arabic. That is real bravery & we need to help.
MLK >>>>>>> âAnti-Racismâ
Let me say it starkly: Anti-Racism is designed to perfectly undo all our imperfect progress towards loving each other. This serves the perverse economic incentives of a tiny few.
Read this poll. This is likely not a subtle effect. [My answer was B).]
Â
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
Love & Friendship >>> âAllyshipâ
It is time to face the unthinkable fact: some group switched the labels on the âPoisonâ and âAntidoteâ jars around 2012. MLK isnât racist. âAnti-Racistsâ are RACISTS. We have been mainlining pure RACISM for a decade.
Look at the D) in the poll.
Â
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
Forgiveness >>>> âCall Outsâ Equality >>> âEquality of Outcomeâ
We are afraid to say it straight. Read the poll. Rerun it professionally if you dare. This is a doomsday program started around 2012.
Weâre afraid to speak because the âRacismâ was diabolically labeled âAntiracismâ
Â
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
Othello cannot bear the thought of doubting Iago. Therefore what can we not bear on the Left? It is time *we* named Iago.
1619 Project is Iago.
Trust & Safety is Iago
âWhiteness Studiesâ is Iago
@splcenter became Iago
âAnti Racismâ is Iago
Terms of Service is where Iago hides.
Â
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
My question is not âdo we love each otherâ: The US is such a modern tolerant country that we elected a Black Man with the middle name ŰŰłÙÙ. Twice. Of course we love each other. Weâre family and family is messy.
We have to help family come back from a cult of spreading racism.
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
My question is this. Assume @DrIbram is a man captured by his own anti-racist cult of cryptic racism. A man who fooled himself. @jack joined the cult with the best of intentions and brought Twitter. @splc joined. Etc.
Q: Do we love enough to forgive & deprogram our own family?
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
Q: Do we love each other enough to ask the most difficult questions?
Q: Did we, with the best of intentions, actually build racism into the fabric of all modern institutional life PRECISELY in the measures we designed to destroy it? Implicit Bias Testing? DEI? Acts of Congress?
Increased daily media focus on Race over the last decade has made me:
Â
Lastly, if you stuck with this thread, know that this account is bombarded constantly by the question âWhy do I never see your tweets?â
Threads like this are why I get throttled. If you quote tweet the lead tweet in the thread with your own observations, they cant stop us all.đ
Â
And in the words of a famous Jewish Carpenter: âLove your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.â
Wise words whether we believe or not.
End.
 This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.