Downloading Twitch clips with Twitchdown

Question: HOW Many Accounts Does Twitter Follow???

Answer: Only 9

WHO Are They Following???

Lunchtime #humour - Ordering a Pizza in 2021!
CALLER: Is this Pizza Delight?

GOOGLE: No sir, it's Google Pizza.

CALLER: I must have dialed the wrong number. Sorry.

GOOGLE: No sir, Google bought Pizza Delight last month.

CALLER: OK, I would like to order a pizza.

Contd... 1/9

GOOGLE: Do you want your usual, sir?

CALLER: My usual? You know me?

GOOGLE: According to our caller ID data sheet, the last 12 times you called you ordered an extra-large pizza with 3 slices of cheese, sausage, pepperoni, mushrooms, and meatballs on a thick crust.

Contd... 2/9

CALLER: OK! That’s what I want.

GOOGLE: May I suggest that this time you order a pizza with ricotta, arugula, sun-dried tomatoes, and olives on a whole wheat gluten-free thin crust?

CALLER: What? I detest vegetables!

GOOGLE: Your cholesterol is not good, sir.

Contd... 3/9

CALLER: How the hell do you know?

GOOGLE: Well, we cross-referenced your home phone number with your medical records. We have the result of your blood tests for the last 7 years.

Contd... 4/9

CALLER: Okay, but I do not want your rotten vegetable pizza! I already take medication for my cholesterol.

GOOGLE: Excuse me sir, but you have not taken your medication regularly.

Contd... 5/9

What are the implications of using hacked data for research?

A short thread inspired by the fact that, before AWs took it down, #Parler was extensively hacked and user data was leaked.

The #Parler dataset seems crazy interesting for doing research, and my first reaction after the breach was to shre it with other #CompSocSci ppl.

However, I started having second thoughts, so what follows is to organize ideas and have it somewhere I can look back to.

2/n

Generally speaking, as far as the ethics of research goes a good advice would be to handle hacked data with caution.

First of all, there's an issue of quality. Data might be altered or incomplete, and the source cannot be considered accountable (assuming src is anonymous).

3/n

Secondly and more importantly, a researcher using the data would probably be violating users’ consent and acting against the data collector's will.

Finally, users’ privacy is at stake, since researchers could see material that users didn’t agree for other people to see.

4/n

Sharing private information without consent might put people at risk of harm.

This is all the more true in cases such as the #ParlerHack, where the leaked information is of particularly sensitive nature, and there’s a high risk of unintended consequences.

5/n

Let's be clear about what @Google, @Apple & @amazon instantly destroying #Parler's ability to be the free-speech version of Twitter is. At its core, this is about the ability to freely communicate one’s thoughts to others — once considered a hallmark of "The American Way." 1/13

What Big Tech is doing is as if Ma Bell in 1973 (ask grandpa) decided what you're saying to a friend on a landline phone was “dangerous." So they cut off the line in the middle of the talk and then sent someone over to physically cut your phone line. That's Stasi shit. 2/13

I realize that a personal conversation is not the same as a public tweet, but the principle is the same. The company that "owns the wires" for your speec — and has special govt rules protecting them due to their position — cuts off your call due to what you are saying. 3/13

If this analogy doesn't work for you, imagine someone tackling and punching you for speaking on a soap box in a public park and then setting your soap box on fire. And the govt being OK with that in a country that has a First Amendment. Moving on ... 4/13

Big Tech shadow banned people for years to just do it "halfway." That way, they could continue to paint an increasingly thin patina on their original govt-protected pledge to promote the free exchange of thought. #freespeech 5/13

Chess may be a good analogy for explaining the difference between a descriptive model of reality and a generative model of reality.

A descriptive model of chess will describe the rules (i.e. initial setup, allowed moves, points per piece, objectives). This tells you how a chessboard might evolve and also narrows the combinations of realistic chess positions.

In contrast, a generative model involves the actual gameplay between competing players that follow the rules. It generates new styles and patterns. It establishes new strategies and tactics. It generates new openings, middle gameplay, and end game tactics.

A generative model is an evolutionary model that leads to emergent behavior. As a consequence, a master of chess is able to recall the layout of chess positions in a real game in an instant, yet is unable to remember pieces placed in random positions.

That is because causality is present in the movements of pieces in a chessboard. An intuitive system like the human mind is able to capture that causality as a means to understanding and recall.