Posted on 12/08/2022 4:23:57 PM PST by janetjanet998
1. A new #TwitterFiles investigation reveals that teams of Twitter employees build blacklists, prevent disfavored tweets from trending, and actively limit the visibility of entire accounts or even trending topics—all in secret, without informing users.
That is interesting. Is there a complete list of the most engaged accounts, especially over time? I would assume Trump was number one at one time, but maybe not. Thanks.
While reading the Prince Harry saga there is a guy named Bouzy that is frequently mentioned. Natethelawyer is suing him. twitter people keep talking about how Bouzy had access to some twitter special API that helped him get people banned who were criticizing Markle and Harry and helped out people’s identities.. I have seen people ask Musk about removing this Bouzy guy access.
I gloss over technical things so really dont know what the deal is with the API business and who all can access it but it’s not just the govt who was influencing this banning.
All I can find is this, so maybe engagements can be misleading.
https://phlanx.com/top/twitter/engagements/100
Stef The Alter Nerd
@StefAlterNerd
·
Dec 3
Hello
@elonmusk
- What plans are there to review third party access to Twitter’s API? Specifically for those who (based on my expertise) I believe to be breaking international data protection law and Twitter’s TOS such as Christopher Bouzy / Bot Sentinel.....
I’m guessing by API they mean “Application Programming Interface” which would probably mean it’s a port into the application that accepts input.
Typically, it would require a simple app that the uploader would need to help ensure anyone trying to upload something would need to have to keep anyone else out.
However. It could simply be a hidden website address that only the uploader knows about, and it could conceivably accept anything, including something as simple as the username that the uploader wants banned.
The question for me is if the Government’s stooge was able to get rid of all the “ Worse than Watergate “ info
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
Dec 6
We can now tell you part of the reason why. On Tuesday, Twitter Deputy General Counsel (and former FBI General Counsel) Jim Baker was fired. Among the reasons? Vetting the first batch of “Twitter Files” – without knowledge of new management.
That looks like a backdoor to directly query the internal twitter database. Just think of the API as a back door he has somehow gotten access to. The API would define how to get through the back door, as well as what types of commands are needed to get search results. Most are “unpublished API’s” meaning the information is kept secret. However, they are easily auditable by the site owner, so either no one has told them it’s been breached, or they don’t care, if he is indeed “exploiting their API.” Hope that made some sense.
I’ve seen reports they are already claiming ~”we’ll release what we can, but a lot was destroyed” so I wouldn’t anything too earth shaking, especially much more showing government interference beyond what was already admitted, that simply matched up with what Zuckerberg had already admitted happened at Facebook as well. Don’t forget SpaceX is depending on lots of big government contract $$$ for example.
Sorry to disappoint but that’s probably all the government tie-in we’re going to get. Still, this information can be used to demonstrate that Twitter was behaving inappropriately in the past, to not only help them forge a new tomorrow for themselves, but put pressure on Google and Facebook etc to come clean as well.
䷈ Annabel 🥝🐦 🏴☠️
@AnnabelKiwiBird
·
Dec 6
@Imi_ahmed
..” that was working OK”? 🤔🤨
People
@elonmusk
fired have allowed #cbouzy/ #BotSentinel (under the guise of good) to dox #data from
@Twitter
for YEARS..victimising real people accounts & violating the #Twitter API & Public
@policy
.
#GDPR #FreeSpeech #Bouzy #privacy
this sort of reminds me of the CIA Family Jewels drama.
Yeah, stuff was exposed...but no doubt much worse was never revealed
This is contemptible.
There were numerous non-insane, non-hysterical medial professionals including a number from Stanford, who were ignored.
Now we know it was a deliberate suppression.
We have the names of every one of them, but they will be protected and remain anonymous. Or should we tear the masks off these ersatz executioners, and give them a dose of their own medicine?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.