Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 238 posts

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#201

Post by rendall »

stickfigure wrote: post #132
fernandotakai wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there already articles 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...

This reminds me of an old episode of This American Life: https://www.thisamericanlife.org/522/tarred-and-feathered There's one group of people that is universally tarred and feathered in the United States and most of the world. We never hear from them, because they can't identify themselves without putting their livelihoods and reputations at risk. That group is pedophiles. It turns out lots of them desperately want…

I remember that TAL article too. It must be awful to be one of these people. I applaud those who endure without ever molesting children and staying away from them. I hope effective treatment becomes available soon

I agree that having a platform to talk about it is probably a social good, again with the caveat that pedophilia isn't glorified or promoted. I think of it like a mental illness and not a moral failing by itself. Any moral failure comes from acting upon those urges

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#202

Post by athms »

tayo42 wrote: post #194
DevKoala wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your argument is based on a perception of America favoring right extremist ideology. Meanwhile for every popular extreme ideology on the right there is a counter extreme on the left ideology. We have people advocating for extreme capitalism and people advocating for a socialist regime. Opposed citizen militias such as Proud Boys and Antifa. Individuals who want a wall around the country and people who believe in open…

I'm not talking about America overall leaning. I'm talking about where the concentration is Antifa isn't real, that is right wing media fear mongering The extremes of the left wing in America isn't winning races. But the extreme fringe of the right wing is. Look at who won and lost primaries. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/26/opinion/sunda... That first image shows what I'm talking about. America's left…

>Antifa isn't real, that is right wing media fear mongering

You better tell that to the lefties that label themselves antifa. What isn't real is a group called Antifa, but the anti-fascist (and anti-capitalist) movement, otherwise known as antifa, is real.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#203

Post by athms »

ghastmaster wrote: post #98
dragontamer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering that this is NYPost, its quite possible. I don't really consider NYPost to be a very respectable institution.

> I don't really consider NYPost to be a very respectable institution. Why is that?

It is a right leaning tabloid owned by News Corp. This is the paper that printed the Hunter Biden laptop story that was sourced from Rudy Giuliani. After the US Capitol riot, the editor told staff to stop writing articles whose source material is from CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, and The New York Times because Trump considered those outlets to be fake news.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#204

Post by [deleted] »

edbob wrote: post #112
Bud wrote: post #77

So we're posting sensationalist, hyper-inflated claptrap from the Murdoch-rag NY Post on Hacker News now? Let's not, instead. If this is really a story, and if that headline is really justified, then a more reliable source can be found. Set phasers to flag and fire.

The Hunter Biden laptop story has been confirmed by witnesses and the cryptographic signatures on the email, while not a single shred of evidence that it's a "plant" has been found. This should give the NYPost a huge boost in credibility over the media outlets that falsely claim that it was a plant. This would (sadly) make the NYPost one of the more reputable media outlets that we have. Besides that, the lawsuit is r…

[deleted]

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#205

Post by rendall »

marcinzm wrote: post #22
rendall wrote: post #16

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.

Welcome to the filter bubble. What you see on twitter, facebook, google, youtube, etc. is going to be radically different than what someone else sees.

Indeed. Knowing this is why I don't immediately doubt the story, despite its being outside my experience

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#206

Post by darepublic »

ardy42 wrote: post #121
stretchcat wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Suppose the NYPost has an axe to grind and went looking for a lawsuit that makes twitter look bad... so what? The lawsuit exists as they claim. That wouldn't mean they're lying, it would only mean they have a different idea of what constitutes news worthiness than you. That wouldn't make it disinformation. Virtually every sentence in the article contains some variation of "the suit alleges." That the suit alleges the…

> Suppose the NYPost has an axe to grind and went looking for a lawsuit that makes twitter look bad... so what? Because that would be more like propaganda than journalism. > That wouldn't mean they're lying, it would only mean they have a different idea of what constitutes news worthiness than you. That wouldn't make it disinformation. Lying is only one of the many ways you can mislead someone. My point was that lyin…

I agree with what you said but I feel like this is standard for most media outlets, including ones somewhat opposed to ny post (most notably the nyt)

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#207

Post by lawnchair_larry »

scohesc wrote: post #105
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why say this? You’re making things up and you happen to be wrong.

I would assume content moderation makes Twitter absolutely nothing and actually just bleeds tens of millions of dollars annually. They'd do their best to outsource the work somewhere that's super cheap (India, etc.) or they'd bring in international talent on H1B visas en-masse since I believe a not insignificant amount of their wages are subsidized by government.

You can’t bring H1-Bs in for content moderation.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#208

Post by lawnchair_larry »

trident5000 wrote: post #83
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why say this? You’re making things up and you happen to be wrong.

Economics always prevails and that is on the side of my argument. Its also industry standard. Do you have a source for me being wrong?

Yeah, it’s not hard to find. Since you literally made it up and just assumed you’re correct with no basis, I will leave the research as an exercise you can pursue. FB has thousands of people in the US doing it.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#209

Post by jl2718 »

throwaway894345 wrote: post #101
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's the headline that is misleading you, or it's a symptom of our times. In any case: it should be blatantly obvious that the Twitter representative did not know or agree that the person in the video was a minor. The insinuation that it's Twitter policy to distribute child pornography is laughable. They have absolutely nothing to gain from it. As to liability: Section 230 is about exactly that situation: tryin…

> Because the alternative, where you either allow your platform to be flooded with swastikas and pornography or get sued for every single mistake you make, is unworkable. The current model isn't workable either. Social media networks and their ad-driven models have hollowed out our democracies by sowing outrage and division at every opportunity. If one believes "The Social Dilemma", these networks have a dial for tun…

This result could be non-ideological on the part of social media and advertisers. They may just be responding to the outrage mob. Advertisers are scared of any negative attention, but social media thrives on outrage. They can maximize their earnings by choosing one side to censor, and the other to amplify outrage. They end up choosing the side that generates the most ad views from the highest-spending audience, and often this is the most irrational in the “man bites dog” sort of way.

So... I was searching for the clip about this from the Howard Stern movie, and I realized that YouTube isn’t even trying to return relevant results anymore. They’re just dangling hate bait in every result. I gave up.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#210

Post by throwaway894345 »

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #147
stretchcat wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the individual users who create the posts, but it's the social media companies using software to select posts to display to others. 'Sow' means to spread or disperse seeds, or when used figuratively, to spread around or propagate something in general. Automated recommendation systems seem to fit the word. They're not creating these seeds, but they sure are sowing them far and wide. (S e wing is what you do with…

I understood the point. My point is that propoganda and it's distribution channels have existed for as long as human speech has. A new distribution channel isn't the problem, it's a society that cannot think for themselves and distinguish between what is real and what is not. Blaming the platform is scapegoating the real problem.

I don’t think people are much worse at thinking for themselves these days, and to the extent that they are, it’s probably fallout from social media. I would like for people to have stronger independent thinking skills (just like I would like us to have infallible immune systems and no proclivity towards cancer and so on) but that’s all wishful thinking. Since we can’t do very much to make ours society more immune to social media, then we should change social media so it doesn’t wreak havoc on our society.
Post reply on HN