61–70 of 238 posts
I've had this happen to me on Facebook. Found a disgusting video involving children, reported it, got a response that there's nothing wrong with it. It's like the people reviewing this stuff have only a second to decide if the content should be deleted.
It's a story that's so completely outside of my personal experience that I cannot evaluate it In 14 years of holding a Twitter account, I've never seen anything even close to such things on Twitter, and wouldn't use the platform if I did. If I were to see child pornography on Twitter, I would immediately report it to law enforcement and close my account Well, I hope that poor child wins justice.
Start reading a single (non porn related) message from one these creeps and your Twitter timeline will be inundated with illegal porn content in no time. Twitter is absolutely rife with that horrible stuff, and Twitter certainly does the minimum to remove any of that, as demonstrated by that article. Why even give the benefit of the doubt? Someone reports CP, remove it, period. Of course, Twitter makes money off it..…
I'm sorry, but is that supposed to be a logical argument? Because it doesn't actually make any sense. Twitter is a platform that allows pretty much anyone with an internet connection to post content. There were, on average, 500 million tweets posted per day last year.
So on one side you have the set of potential content creators, churning out half a billion tweets per day, and that number will almost certainly continue to steadily increase. So, as a company with a set amount of income, and who is beholden to its shareholders, what's your plan to moderate 500 million tweets per day while still turning a reasonable profit?
Now then, I expect a swift retribution from other companies to do the "right" thing and banish Twitter from our reach. Remove them from Google searches, de-platform them from the App Store and cut their access to hosting services. They have failed to moderate their platform, in fact in this case it seems they did on the contrary, so it is only just they get their part of punishment.
Truly a disingenuous argument. Parler didn't get TOS'd because they had things fall through their moderation process; they got TOS'd because they did not have a workable moderation process in place, period. Twitter obviously does make mistakes - both AIs and humans are fallible - but they have about as good a moderation process in place as it's possible to have with the amount of message traffic they process. Also, I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A lot of Twitter users are moving their followers to Substack. Check out what Balaji is doing. The social network MeWe is growing rapidly. There is always room for competition but the people complaining censorship are defeatist.
Not to fall into the category of being "defeatist" even more, but platforms that actually pose a threat to the established social media channels (like Parler did), get a very special kind of treatment by the "FAANG-cartel" as you might have noticed. The solution is political change, imo, irregardless of all the problems that come with policing a multinational website like Twitter.
Parler isn't competing with Twitter or Facebook because the average person doesn't want to see a feed full of white supremacist's discussing conspiracy theories.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i've been on twitter for the same time and last year was the first time i saw people talking about "map" which apparently means "minor attracted person"[0]. while searching around i found that there's a LOT of twitter accounts basically spewing pedophilia-related/adjacent stuff. i reported every single one of them and... nothing was done. not a single one was removed. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor-attracted…
Write an article about it
according to one of them, twitter changed their TOS to allow people to discuss their attraction to minors on their platform[0].
people always take about "dog whistles" -- imho this is a big one, at least for me. allowing pedophiles to discuss their attraction to minors openly on your platform is completely absurd.
[0]https://thenextweb.com/socialmedia/2020/01/09/twitter-lets-p...
Wow, I don't mean to issue an ad-hominem attack... but I do not consider anything from NY Post legitimate, I'd even venture to say NY Post is a tabloid owned by News Corporation, and surprised that this is on HackerNews.
That seems to be the vast majority of stories submitted by OP, and the clickbait and inflammatory titles tend to rise to the front page.
I am not sure there is a proper solution for this. How can they verify the age of an unknown person?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Start reading a single (non porn related) message from one these creeps and your Twitter timeline will be inundated with illegal porn content in no time. Twitter is absolutely rife with that horrible stuff, and Twitter certainly does the minimum to remove any of that, as demonstrated by that article. Why even give the benefit of the doubt? Someone reports CP, remove it, period. Of course, Twitter makes money off it..…
"People claim Twitter can't possibly moderate content at scale, except that Twitter makes money at that same scale." I'm sorry, but is that supposed to be a logical argument? Because it doesn't actually make any sense. Twitter is a platform that allows pretty much anyone with an internet connection to post content. There were, on average, 500 million tweets posted per day last year. So on one side you have the set of…
Yes, because these social medias can't have it both ways, I already addressed that. If you make money at scale, well you are responsible for moderation at scale, period.
Your argument is just apologizing for Twitter's bad behaviour when it comes to illegal content moderation.
The regulation must be forward-looking. Trying to respond after a social media company has harmed the public, say by hosting illegal content, is not good enough. Social media companies cannot be allowed to say "Oh, sorry Congress, we made a mistake. We have now fixed it and it won't happen again."
It might be that we need an agency like the FCC to regulate the internal operations of these companies and bring about true shared decision making.
Attempts to exclude regulatory authorities from meetings should result in criminal charges and prison time for repeat offenders.