<p>Don't get me wrong, I love twitter and think it's awesome.</p>
<p>Sometimes messages do disappear though, and if you don't want me to write it off to accidents, bugs, and the continual evolution of an exploding service that's cool. I have occasionally seen some hiccup-y behavior from this service, it's software and sometimes software has bugs. Maybe I should put on a tinfoil hat and assume there was a Sinister Reason instead?</p>
<p>R.</p>
<p><a href="http://mediumreality.com">mediumreality.com</a></p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 2, 2011 11:45 AM, "John Adams" <<a href="mailto:jna@retina.net">jna@retina.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 11:34 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rachelyra@gmail.com" target="_blank">rachelyra@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>Maybe he means how it's always been a buggy web service that occasionally sloughs info. It's actually gotten a lot better in that regard over the last year or two. Their recent whispersys acquisition points to some interest in their part on protecting people's info.</p>
</blockquote><div>As a member of both the early Twitter operations team and Twitter security team I feel like I have to set the record straight here. It's offensive to me to have anyone write off four years of my and other teams work as 'a buggy service that occasionally sloughs info'. We process many thousands of messags second, with ample capacity to handle major world events such as the London riots and sporting events. </div>
<div><br></div><div>We've worked extremely hard in the face of a ridiculous level of growth (from 250k users to > 100 M active users in under four years) and maintain thousands of servers, a far cry from when we strugged with the onslaught of requests to a new and emerging service. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Twitter has never mediated content. We don't censor, that means we don't censor trending topics and we don't censor except in extremely limited contexts which are mandated by law. </div><div>
<br></div><div>Even when mandated by law, our lawyers have gone to court to fight for the users, such as the unsealing of the DoJ's letter regarding Wikileaks. See: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_subpoena" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_subpoena</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>There's a whole FAQ on this you can read here if you're interested...</div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://support.twitter.com/articles/18311-the-twitter-rules" target="_blank">http://support.twitter.com/articles/18311-the-twitter-rules</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>Take off the tinfoil hat. </div><div><br></div><div>-john</div><div><br></div><div>Note: I don't speak for Twitter. I speak for myself and my experiences there.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div>
<div>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>R.</p>
<p><a href="http://mediumreality.com" target="_blank">mediumreality.com</a></p><div><div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 2, 2011 10:40 AM, "Doctor Popular" <<a href="mailto:yoyogenius@gmail.com" target="_blank">yoyogenius@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
When you say "Twitter has personally censored some of my tweets" do<br>
you have anything to support it? Is it possible that many of the<br>
retweets are just from spambots that just got shut down or that maybe<br>
the retweets are still there, but can't be seen?<br>
<br>
I just ask because I have yet to see any evidence of Twitter actively<br>
censoring tweets, especially for something like OWS.<br>
<br>
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 12:55 AM, John Morgan <<a href="mailto:dr1ce315@gmail.com" target="_blank">dr1ce315@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Dear Noisebridge,<br>
><br>
> In the current political climate both here and abroad, I am highly concerned<br>
> with the censorship that is occurring on a seemingly daily basis.<br>
><br>
> I see two layer of this model that needs some "hacker" modifications....<br>
><br>
> #1) The Physical Layer: About two weeks ago at #occupysf there were<br>
> widespread reports that 3 mobile providers had shutdown their networks in<br>
> the area. I happened to be there that night, and luckily had no problems as<br>
> I had a different provider then the 3 described in various tweets. It<br>
> really doesn't matter if it's collusion with the telco's or if the cops are<br>
> using frequency jammers. We need to be able to find a solid physical link<br>
> so that citizen journalism can be heard. This may be done by using many<br>
> other frequencies that are not targeted for jamming... Satellite? Ham? Other<br>
> ideas? (Smoke Signal Packets? Passenger pigeons carrying microSD Cards?<br>
> (kind-of joking here, but trying to think outside the box))<br>
><br>
> #2) The app layer: Twitter has personally censored some of my tweets, and<br>
> assume others are experiencing the same thing. (I may see 10 retweets that<br>
> are suddenly gone the next day or tweets never get out to the feeds in the<br>
> first place, etc...) I realize there are some encrypted, uncensored,<br>
> secure options to twitter; but what are the most popular? Are people<br>
> actually using them (are they getting exposure?)<br>
><br>
> I think problem #1 is the largest and anyone who is willing to help overcome<br>
> such an issue I would love to brainstorm with..<br>
><br>
> WE THE HACKERS are the first line of defense against censorship, and if we<br>
> can't help, who can?<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" target="_blank">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
> <a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br>
-Doctor Popular<br>
Mobile Phone Musician and Photographer<br>
<a href="tel:415-724-9267" value="+14157249267" target="_blank">415-724-9267</a><br>
<a href="http://www.DocPop.org" target="_blank">www.DocPop.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.ObjectiveScenes.com" target="_blank">www.ObjectiveScenes.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.BeepsAndSmudges.com" target="_blank">www.BeepsAndSmudges.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.twitter.com/docpop" target="_blank">www.twitter.com/docpop</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" target="_blank">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" target="_blank">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>
</blockquote></div>