I no longer use Twitter, so I’m not sure whether this is a possibility now, but it was at one point.
Was the link itself a forwarding link through a potentially spammy/tracking service, even though the end link is a legitimate NPR page? I do not know if Twitter shows the resulting link at the end of a redirect chain in that widget or just what is posted.
I’m also unsure if NPR has any sort of advertising that could be using shady forwarding from the page that Twitter may be seeing in the link. Advertising networks incorporating shady shit on regular pages happens a lot since they don’t actually verify every ad.
Now, I doubt either of those are the case, but they’re possibilities to verify first before jumping on a bandwagon. Twitter is such dogshit now that I doubt they’re doing more than the basic anymore, almost definitely not actually following links and redirects to check for even basic safety stuff like that since Elon took over.
Quite the opposite actually, otherwise lemmy will just devolve into another echo chamber, just like Twitter has, and most social media sites. The down votes I got simply for bringing up points that might happen to not fit the hive mind mentality are just as common here obviously, even when expressing up front that I don’t actually believe those points.
Amazing how fragile some people are, so filled with hatred over a billionaire that lives rent free in their head and doesn’t even think about them at all that they downvote a discussion simply because it might bring up valid points they hadn’t considered in their knee jerk reaction.
You aren’t being downvoted “simply for bringing up points that might happen to not fit the hive mind mentality.” You’re being downvoted for making up a contrived excuse that was easily disproven by the fucking thumbnail, let alone the article, for your own titillation.
Sorry if I don’t know everything about how the shitbox of Twitter functions and don’t trust the current the message to actually be truthful.
It could have been that Twitter followed redirects to display the final link in the message, but any of the links in that process through suspicious domains would prompt the message, regardless of the actual endpoint.
Just because we know the most likely reason, that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss other alternatives, even if they’re less likely, or even unlikely.
It’s clear now that no one here either understands the purpose of a devil’s advocate for discussion, or cares to have an actual discussion, instead preferring to just have every post be a “fuck Elon” circlejerk. So I’ll let you all get back to handling that with each other. Amazing how fast lemmy just turned into another reddit with a complete lack of real discussion anywhere, just the same bullshit everywhere as if it does anything.
I get and appreciate devil’s advocate sort of approach. I sometimes do that. But I do so by trying to find additional context and concrete information. I don’t think it’s as useful to go to some lengths to invent hypotheticals not in evidence. Here we have the full link in context with Twitter list of reasons of why they could mark it unsafe. Reading through that list and that link, there’s not a whole lot of room for a surprisingly understandable non obvious reason to put above the more straightforward explanation.
Au contraire, the devil absolutely needs an advocate, to make sure he’s being called out on the right bullshit and not just whatever accusation is thrown his way.
I guess it’s possible, and it looks like NPR changed the word “tiktok” to “video” in the URL, but I don’t think Xitter deserves the benefit of the doubt here. NPR is a pretty solid media organization overall, with standards that they mostly adhere to, and no paywall. They’re unlikely to be using any technical shenanigans, and critically there has already been a history.
The last time they said things Musk didn’t like, he decided that they should be lumped in with the likes of RT as a state-run propaganda arm, even though the government share of funding is indirect and limited, and they’ve got decades of history of solid reporting from an American center to center-left perspective, and even that is more meeting their audience where they are with story selection and tone, rather than shading facts of the stories they do tell.
Every link posted to twitter is followed to the end of any redirect chains that may be present and then the end result is shortened IIRC (take this with several grains of salt as this is just what I’ve heard previously and it may be incorrect or may have become incorrect)
Devil’s advocate:
I no longer use Twitter, so I’m not sure whether this is a possibility now, but it was at one point.
Was the link itself a forwarding link through a potentially spammy/tracking service, even though the end link is a legitimate NPR page? I do not know if Twitter shows the resulting link at the end of a redirect chain in that widget or just what is posted.
I’m also unsure if NPR has any sort of advertising that could be using shady forwarding from the page that Twitter may be seeing in the link. Advertising networks incorporating shady shit on regular pages happens a lot since they don’t actually verify every ad.
Now, I doubt either of those are the case, but they’re possibilities to verify first before jumping on a bandwagon. Twitter is such dogshit now that I doubt they’re doing more than the basic anymore, almost definitely not actually following links and redirects to check for even basic safety stuff like that since Elon took over.
I have to assume the link posted was a direct link to NPR. The screenshot in the article lists the npr.org URL specifically as the “unsafe” link.
The devil doesn’t need an advocate
Quite the opposite actually, otherwise lemmy will just devolve into another echo chamber, just like Twitter has, and most social media sites. The down votes I got simply for bringing up points that might happen to not fit the hive mind mentality are just as common here obviously, even when expressing up front that I don’t actually believe those points.
Amazing how fragile some people are, so filled with hatred over a billionaire that lives rent free in their head and doesn’t even think about them at all that they downvote a discussion simply because it might bring up valid points they hadn’t considered in their knee jerk reaction.
You aren’t being downvoted “simply for bringing up points that might happen to not fit the hive mind mentality.” You’re being downvoted for making up a contrived excuse that was easily disproven by the fucking thumbnail, let alone the article, for your own titillation.
Sorry if I don’t know everything about how the shitbox of Twitter functions and don’t trust the current the message to actually be truthful.
It could have been that Twitter followed redirects to display the final link in the message, but any of the links in that process through suspicious domains would prompt the message, regardless of the actual endpoint.
Just because we know the most likely reason, that doesn’t mean we can’t discuss other alternatives, even if they’re less likely, or even unlikely.
It’s clear now that no one here either understands the purpose of a devil’s advocate for discussion, or cares to have an actual discussion, instead preferring to just have every post be a “fuck Elon” circlejerk. So I’ll let you all get back to handling that with each other. Amazing how fast lemmy just turned into another reddit with a complete lack of real discussion anywhere, just the same bullshit everywhere as if it does anything.
I get and appreciate devil’s advocate sort of approach. I sometimes do that. But I do so by trying to find additional context and concrete information. I don’t think it’s as useful to go to some lengths to invent hypotheticals not in evidence. Here we have the full link in context with Twitter list of reasons of why they could mark it unsafe. Reading through that list and that link, there’s not a whole lot of room for a surprisingly understandable non obvious reason to put above the more straightforward explanation.
Au contraire, the devil absolutely needs an advocate, to make sure he’s being called out on the right bullshit and not just whatever accusation is thrown his way.
I guess it’s possible, and it looks like NPR changed the word “tiktok” to “video” in the URL, but I don’t think Xitter deserves the benefit of the doubt here. NPR is a pretty solid media organization overall, with standards that they mostly adhere to, and no paywall. They’re unlikely to be using any technical shenanigans, and critically there has already been a history.
The last time they said things Musk didn’t like, he decided that they should be lumped in with the likes of RT as a state-run propaganda arm, even though the government share of funding is indirect and limited, and they’ve got decades of history of solid reporting from an American center to center-left perspective, and even that is more meeting their audience where they are with story selection and tone, rather than shading facts of the stories they do tell.
Every link posted to twitter is followed to the end of any redirect chains that may be present and then the end result is shortened IIRC (take this with several grains of salt as this is just what I’ve heard previously and it may be incorrect or may have become incorrect)