Zitat Elon Musk@elonmusk My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci 11:58 AM · Dec 11, 2022
Hodgetwins@hodgetwins Replying to @elonmusk Let me guess, You found messages between Twitter execs and our govt. (Fauci and team) pushing for censorship of anyone that didn’t go along with their narrative on Covid?
Journalisten. Die Berichte ueber die manipulierte Wahl waren ihnen keinen Einzeiler unter ferner liefen wert, aber wenn es einen der Ihren trifft, findet man nach einer Stunde so einen Aufmacher, in dem man sich ueber Zensurmethoden beschwert, die in den letzten 5 Jahren keiner Erwaehnung wert waren (wobei sie in diesem Fall sogar eine Begruendung fuer die Sperren liefern, die man in der Vergangenheit vergeblich gesucht hat).
Und dann wundern sie sich, warum sie zusammen mit Politikern die mit Abstand meistverhasste Berufsgruppe sind.
Wohlgemerkt: Wir sprechen hier von Springer-Presse. Was die linksradikalen Medien wie SPON oder die Tagesschau ueber den Komplex berichtet haben, hab ich mir gar nicht erst angetan.
Zitat Zhang Danhong@ZhangDanhong Meine Achtung vor #ElonMusk steigt und steigt. 2:44 PM · Dec 16, 2022
Zhang Danhong@ZhangDanhong Er will Fauci verklagen, weil er Beweise hat, dass Fauci Bio-Labore finanziert hat, auch denen Corona rausgekommen ist. Fauci hat zudem Twitter unter Druck gesetzt, am China-Virus festzuhalten. 2:54 PM · Dec 16, 2022
Dazu noch mal drei Gedanken: I. Wenn Twitter wirklich Journos sperrt, die schlecht über ihn berichten, dann kann ich das aus Prinzip nicht unterstützen.
II. Wir sollten aufpassen, uns nicht zu sehr mit Musk zu assoziieren. Der Mann ist unvorstellbar reich und fährt seit Jahren seine eigene Agenda. Eben die "Mottenphilosophie für den Menschen". Man mag Musk persönlich sympathisch finden, mit seinen Zielen übereinstimmen oder ihn für temporär nützlich halten -- was auch immer -- , aber nicht vergessen, dass es letztlich ein sehr ungleiches Zweckbündnis ist.
Ich habe das Gefühl, dass Musk seine Vorgehensweise in den nächsten Monaten überraschend ändern wird.
III. Das mit Fauci hätte ich gerne ausführlicher als 280 Zeichen. Was hat es damit auf sich und was ist eigentlich wirklich bekannt?
12.12.2022: Musk enthüllt, Twitter hatte geheime schwarze Listen (to be continued)
Zitat von Johanes im Beitrag #155@Ulrich Elkmann Ich finde es grade nicht. Gibt es irgendwo eine Dokumentation zum Thema "Twittergate"? Möglichst Zugang zu den Orginaldokumenten.
Nicht gebündelt (noch nicht). Aber seit gestern kann man, auch ohne sich dort angemeldet zu haben, auf Twitter wieder frei mitlesen. Und dort findet man leicht die Stränge von Matt Taibbi. https://twitter.com/mtaibbi
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Capsule Summaries of all Twitter Files Threads to Date, With Links and a Glossary For those who haven't been following, a compilation of one-paragraph summaries of all the Twitter Files threads by every reporter. With links and notes on key revelations Matt Taibbi 3 min ago
It’s January 4th, 2023, which means Twitter Files stories have been coming out for over a month. Because these are weedsy tales, and may be hard to follow if you haven’t from the beginning, I’ve written up capsule summaries of each of the threads by all of the Twitter Files reporters, and added links to the threads and accounts of each. At the end, in response to some readers (especially foreign ones) who’ve found some of the alphabet-soup government agency names confusing, I’ve included a brief glossary of terms to help as well.
In order, the Twitter Files threads:
Twitter Files Part 1: December 2, 2022, by @mtaibbi
TWITTER AND THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY
Recounting the internal drama at Twitter surrounding the decision to block access to a New York Post exposé on Hunter Biden in October, 2020.
Key revelations: Twitter blocked the story on the basis of its “hacked materials” policy, but executives internally knew the decision was problematic. “Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?” is how comms official Brandon Borrman put it. Also: when a Twitter contractor polls members of Congress about the decision, they hear Democratic members want more moderation, not less, and “the First Amendment isn’t absolute.”
1a. Twitter Files Supplemental, December 6, 2022, by @mtaibbi
THE “EXITING” OF TWITTER DEPUTY GENERAL COUNSEL JIM BAKER
A second round of Twitter Files releases was delayed, as new addition Bari Weiss discovers former FBI General Counsel and Twitter Deputy General Counsel Jim Baker was reviewing the first batches of Twitter Files documents, whose delivery to reporters had slowed.
Twitter Files Part 2, by @BariWeiss, December 8, 2022
TWITTER’S SECRET BLACKLISTS
Bari Weiss gives a long-awaited answer to the question, “Was Twitter shadow-banning people?” It did, only the company calls it “visibility filtering.” Twitter also had a separate, higher council called SIP-PES that decided cases for high-visibility, controversial accounts.
Key revelations: Twitter had a huge toolbox for controlling the visibility of any user, including a “Search Blacklist” (for Dan Bongino), a “Trends Blacklist” for Stanford’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, and a “Do Not Amplify” setting for conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Weiss quotes a Twitter employee: “Think about visibility filtering as being a way for us to suppress what people see to different levels. It’s a very powerful tool.” With help from @abigailshrier, @shellenbergermd, @nelliebowles, and @isaacgrafstein.
Twitter Files, Part 3, by @mtaibbi, December 9, 2022
THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP, October 2020 - January 6th, 2021
First in a three-part series looking at how Twitter came to the decision to suspend Donald Trump. The idea behind the series is to show how all of Twitter’s “visibility filtering” tools were on display and deployed after January 6th, 2021. Key Revelations: Trust and Safety chief Yoel Roth not only met regularly with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, but with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI). Also, Twitter was aggressively applying “visibility filtering” tools to Trump well before the election.
Twitter Files Part 4, by @ShellenbergerMD, December 10, 2022
THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP, January 7th, 2021
This thread by Michael Shellenberger looks at the key day after the J6 riots and before Trump would ultimately be banned from Twitter on January 8th, showing how Twitter internally reconfigured its rules to make a Trump ban fit their policies.
Key revelations: at least one Twitter employee worried about a “slippery slope” in which “an online platform CEO with a global presence… can gatekeep speech for the entire world,” only to be shot down. Also, chief censor Roth argues for a ban on congressman Matt Gaetz even though it “doesn’t quite fit anywhere (duh),” and Twitter changed its “public interest policy” to clear a path for Trump’s removal.
Twitter Files Part 5, by @BariWeiss, December 11, 2022
THE REMOVAL OF DONALD TRUMP, January 8th, 2021
As angry as many inside Twitter were with Donald Trump after the January 6th Capitol riots, staffers struggled to suspend his account, saying things like, “I think we’d have a hard time saying this is incitement.” As documented by Weiss, they found a way to pull the trigger anyway.
Key revelations: there were dissenters in the company (“Maybe because I am from China,” said one employee, “I deeply understand how censorship can destroy the public conversation”), but are overruled by senior executives like Vijaya Gadde and Roth, who noted many on Twitter’s staff were citing the “Banality of Evil,” and comparing those who favored sticking to a strict legalistic interpretation of Twitter’s rules — i.e. keep Trump, who had “no violation” — to “Nazis following orders.”
Twitter Files Part 6, by @mtaibbi, December 16, 2022
TWITTER, THE FBI SUBSIDIARY
Twitter’s contact with the FBI was “constant and pervasive,” as FBI personnel, mainly in the San Francisco field office, regularly sent lists of “reports” to Twitter, often about Americans with low follower counts making joke tweets. Tweeters on both the left and the right were affected.
Key revelations: A senior Twitter executive reports, “FBI was adamant no impediments to sharing” classified information exist. Twitter also agreed to “bounce” content on the recommendations of a wide array of governmental and quasi-governmental actors, from the FBI to the Homeland Security agency CISA to Stanford’s Election Integrity Project to state governments. The company one day received so many moderation requests from the FBI, an executive congratulated staffers at the end for completing the “monumental undertaking.”
Twitter Files Part 7, by @ShellenbergerMD, December 19, 2022
THE FBI AND HUNTER BIDEN’S LAPTOP
The Twitter Files story increases its focus on the company’s relationship to federal law enforcement and intelligence, and shows intense communication between the FBI and Twitter just before the release of the Post’s Hunter Biden story.
Key Revelations: San Francisco agent Elvis Chan “sends 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter,” the evening before the release of the Post story. Also, Baker in an email explains Twitter was compensated for “processing requests” by the FBI, saying “I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!”
Twitter Files Part 8, by @lhfang, December 20, 2022
HOW TWITTER QUIETLY AIDED THE PENTAGON’S COVERT ONLINE PSYOP CAMPAIGN
Lee Fang takes a fascinating detour, looking at how Twitter for years approved and supported Pentagon-backed covert operations. Noting the company explicitly testified to Congress that it didn’t allow such behavior, the platform nonetheless was a clear partner in state-backed programs involving fake accounts.
Key revelations: after the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) sent over a list of 52 Arab-language accounts “we use to amplify certain messages,” Twitter agreed to “whitelist” them. Ultimately the program would be outed in the Washington Post in 2022 — two years after Twitter and other platforms stopped assisting — but contrary to what came out in those reports, Twitter knew about and/or assisted in these programs for at least three years, from 2017-2020.
Lee wrote a companion piece for the Intercept here:
Twitter Files Part 9, by @mtaibbi, December 24th, 2022
TWITTER AND “OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES”
The Christmas Eve thread (I should have waited a few days to publish!) further details how the channels of communication between the federal government and Twitter operated, and reveals that Twitter directly or indirectly received lists of flagged content from “Other Government Agencies,” i.e. the CIA.
Key revelations: CIA officials attended at least one conference with Twitter in the summer of 2020, and companies like Twitter and Facebook received “OGA briefings,” at their regular “industry” meetings held in conjunction with the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. The FBI and the “Foreign Influence Task Force” met regularly “not just with Twitter, but with Yahoo!, Twitch, Cloudfare, LinkedIn, even Wikimedia.”
Twitter Files Part 10, by @DavidZweig, December 28, 2022
HOW TWITTER RIGGED THE COVID DEBATE
David Zweig drills down into how Twitter throttled down information about COVID that was true but perhaps inconvenient for public officials, “discrediting doctors and other experts who disagreed.”
Key Revelations: Zweig found memos from Twitter personnel who’d liaised with Biden administration officials who were “very angry” that Twitter had not deplatformed more accounts. White House officials for instance wanted attention on reporter Alex Berenson. Zweig also found “countless” instances of Twitter banning or labeling “misleading” accounts that were true or merely controversial. A Rhode Island physician named Andrew Bostom, for instance, was suspended for, among other things, referring to the results of a peer-reviewed study on mRNA vaccines.
Twitter Files Parts 11 and 12, by @mtaibbi, January 3, 2023
HOW TWITTER LET THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY IN
TWITTER AND THE FBI “BELLY BUTTON”
These two threads focus respectively on the second half of 2017, and a period stretching roughly from summer of 2020 through the present. The first describes how Twitter fell under pressure from Congress and the media to produce “material” showing a conspiracy of Russian accounts on their platform, and the second shows how Twitter tried to resist fulfilling moderation requests for the State Department, but ultimately agreed to let State and other agencies send requests through the FBI, which agent Chan calls “the belly button of the USG.” Revelations: at the close of 2017, Twitter makes a key internal decision. Outwardly, the company would claim independence and promise that content would only be removed at “our sole discretion.” The internal guidance says, in writing, that Twitter will remove accounts “identified by the U.S. intelligence community” as “identified by the U.S.. intelligence community as a state-sponsored entity conducting cyber-operations.”
The second thread shows how Twitter took in requests from everyone — Treasury, HHS, NSA, FBI, DHS, etc. — and also received personal requests from politicians like Democratic congressman Adam Schiff, who asked to have journalist Paul Sperry suspended.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat von 6 Jan 2023Twitter has reportedly been the victim of a major data breach, with hackers posting the email addresses of 235 million users online. The hack might have occurred as early as 2021.
The New York Post reports that Twitter has suffered a significant data breach that has resulted in the email addresses of over 235 million users being published on an internet forum. The breach, which may have occurred as early as 2021, has raised concerns about the potential for hacking, phishing, and doxxing.
According to Alon Gal, co-founder of Israeli cybersecurity firm Hudson Rock, the latest Twitter breach is “one of the most significant leaks I’ve seen” and “will, unfortunately, lead to a lot of hacking, targeted phishing, and doxxing.” Gal posted screenshots of the hacked email addresses on his LinkedIn page and spoke to the Washington Post about the potential implications of the breach. “This database is going to be used by hackers, political hacktivists, and of course, governments to harm our privacy even further,” he said.
Twitter has yet to comment on the report, which was first posted on social media on December 24. The social media firm has also yet to respond to inquiries about the data breach since that date, leaving it unclear what action it took to investigate or remediate the issue.
The hacker or hackers behind the breach have not been identified, and there are no clues as to their location. It is possible that the breach took place before Elon Musk acquired the company in 2022. Initially, reports about the size and scope of the breach varied, with some accounts suggesting that as many as 400 million email addresses and phone numbers had been stolen.
Troy Hunt, the creator of the breach-notification site Have I Been Pwned, which alerts users if their information has been leaked, viewed the stolen data and stated on Twitter that it appeared to be “pretty much what it’s been described as.”
Bitte beachten Sie diese Forumsregeln: Beiträge, die persönliche Angriffe gegen andere Poster, Unhöflichkeiten oder vulgäre Ausdrücke enthalten, sind nicht erlaubt; ebensowenig Beiträge mit rassistischem, fremdenfeindlichem oder obszönem Inhalt und Äußerungen gegen den demokratischen Rechtsstaat sowie Beiträge, die gegen gesetzliche Bestimmungen verstoßen. Hierzu gehört auch das Verbot von Vollzitaten, wie es durch die aktuelle Rechtsprechung festgelegt ist. Erlaubt ist lediglich das Zitieren weniger Sätze oder kurzer Absätze aus einem durch Copyright geschützten Dokument; und dies nur dann, wenn diese Zitate in einen argumentativen Kontext eingebunden sind. Bilder und Texte dürfen nur hochgeladen werden, wenn sie copyrightfrei sind oder das Copyright bei dem Mitglied liegt, das sie hochlädt. Bitte geben Sie das bei dem hochgeladenen Bild oder Text an. Links können zu einzelnen Artikeln, Abbildungen oder Beiträgen gesetzt werden, aber nicht zur Homepage von Foren, Zeitschriften usw. Bei einem Verstoß wird der betreffende Beitrag gelöscht oder redigiert. Bei einem massiven oder bei wiederholtem Verstoß endet die Mitgliedschaft. Eigene Beiträge dürfen nachträglich in Bezug auf Tippfehler oder stilistisch überarbeitet, aber nicht in ihrer Substanz verändert oder gelöscht werden. Nachträgliche Zusätze, die über derartige orthographische oder stilistische Korrekturen hinausgehen, müssen durch "Edit", "Nachtrag" o.ä. gekennzeichnet werden. Ferner gehört das Einverständnis mit der hier dargelegten Datenschutzerklärung zu den Forumsregeln.