Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under what rules is Twitter required to turn a reasonable profit? (What is a "reasonable" profit?)
Are you familiar with how publicly traded corporations work?
Yes. Are you?
Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
231–238 of 238 posts
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a pointless ad hominem that is completely irrelevant to this case. The court can easily verify whether the victim was a minor.
> This is a pointless ad hominem that is completely irrelevant to this case. If you're trying to base your claims on appeals to authority, the very least you should do is verify what your authority defends and stands for and what it's track record. Brushing off holes in your appeal to authority with empty references to ad hominem a does nothing to substantiate your claim.
What is the appeal to authority? That the court can easily verify the boy's age? I'm pretty comfortable with trusting the court on that matter. There is an appeals process if they drop the ball here. It works pretty well in simple matters like that.
If you mean something different by "appeal to authority", then you're going to have to spell it out because I don't see it. But in that case, I think you're probably misunderstanding my views.
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s same as asking why should government control abuse of meth and heroin. These drugs along with social media, exploit certain nature of how our brain works to make us addicted and alter our state of mind.
Yet we're seeing decriminalization of drugs, needle exchanges, etc that counter your argument. The world is becoming more liberal to drugs because criminalization has created a larger problem (black markets, impure drugs, etc). I get your point is to have some more regulation, however the argument is much more nuanced than "Ban All Social Media" which is what I'm trying to portray.
I actually agree with decriminalizing drugs, but I think they should be controlled like any other prescriptions or like weed is currently controlled. Specifically portion controlled so that drug does not destroy person's life. I have experimented meth and many other drugs. Mind that if you haven't done meth and you try to compare it to some other drug like alcohol then you are just ignorant. I have to say that it's easy to get lost in meth and a lot of people don't have mental will(or maybe capacity) to get out of the drug and hence I have to say that this type of thing does need to be controlled in some manner.
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#234So 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…
"the cryptographic signatures on the email" Like, there were TLS headers in an email client on the laptop that were confirmed to be on a server somewhere? Authenticated by a neutral forensics expert?
Or are you saying Hunter Biden using GPG or PGP to encrypt/sign all of his email and the emails were authenticated that way by a neutral forensics expert?
Because my understanding is that Giuliani never actually released the actual data, and that the FBI itself has the laptop.
"confirmed by witnesses?" Also, I didn't see any media outlets report that "it was a plant," just reporting that the FBI was investigating the situation.
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get it, that's its the Post. But there are a lot of things going against the major outlets in this debate: a.) It's a federal case so except for identities, most of the damning information against Twitter is out there b.) Major outlets such as NYT like to brag about the size of their newsrooms, but don't seem to have the resources to cover stories of CP on Twitter and the lackadaisical attitude of its censors c.) M…
How is "all content matter out there"? From what I can tell, all we have is allegations from the accusing party.
It's a federal suit filed in DC, all the filings are public data, save for identities.
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#236Earlier 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..…
> Why even give the benefit of the doubt? Someone reports CP, remove it, period. Of course, Twitter makes money off it... Because it may not be CP, but a malicious reporter bullying the poster.
I'm sorry, are you claiming people posting porn on Twitter are being 'bullied' by 'malicious reporters'? when Twitter themselves can't even trace the origin of the pornographic material posted on their platform, when they legally have to since it's not covered by safe harbor laws at first place? Who the hell are you kidding?
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why even give the benefit of the doubt? Someone reports CP, remove it, period. Of course, Twitter makes money off it... Because it may not be CP, but a malicious reporter bullying the poster.
I'm sorry, are you claiming people posting porn on Twitter are being 'bullied' by 'malicious reporters'? when Twitter themselves can't even trace the origin of the pornographic material posted on their platform, when they legally have to since it's not covered by safe harbor laws at first place? Who the hell are you kidding?
Bullying by false reporting is a common event. Sex workers are a common target for bullying. It stands to reason that bullying by claiming CP is probably not uncommon.
Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry, are you claiming people posting porn on Twitter are being 'bullied' by 'malicious reporters'? when Twitter themselves can't even trace the origin of the pornographic material posted on their platform, when they legally have to since it's not covered by safe harbor laws at first place? Who the hell are you kidding?
Bullying by false reporting is a common event. Sex workers are a common target for bullying. It stands to reason that bullying by claiming CP is probably not uncommon.
> Bullying by false reporting is a common event. Sex workers are a common target for bullying. It stands to reason that bullying by claiming CP is probably not uncommon.
Completely irrelevant concern. Kid's safety is more important, than any concerns about 'sex workers' publishing pornographic content on Twitter. Avoiding the bullying of kids by removing revenge porn published on social media is more important than your concerns about 'sex workers' getting their porn removed.
Twitter is legally required to be able to trace the source of anything pornographic uploaded on their platform at first place, as porn is not protected by safe harbor laws or section 230. A sex worker didn't post that child porn video featuring that young boy Twitter refused to remove.
There is plenty of other avenues for 'sex workers' to post pornographic content on the internet, removing it from Twitter doesn't make anyone a 'victim', it protect children.