Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#221

Post by icebraining » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:14 PM UTC

throw_m239339 wrote: post #35

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.

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.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#222

Post by bobthepanda » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:15 PM UTC

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #213

e9 wrote: post #187

Earlier 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.

Who is arguing for "banning all social media" in this comment chain? You're attacking a strawman.

We need high regulation of recommended content, probably by moving recommendations out of the scope of section 230. Pointing to a not banned but extremely highly regulated decriminalized sector kind of speaks for itself. It's not like I could go on a San Francisco street corner tomorrow and start selling pot like a paperboy.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#223

Post by icebraining » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:18 PM UTC

fakedang wrote: post #179

shakna wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Edit:- to the folks down voting me, please show me some major outlets (NYT, BBC, etc) reporting on this. As far as we are concerned, this kind of stuff should be news. The story is only a few hours old. "Mainstream" media often requires a level of verification that may take a few more days before you see their stories happen.

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.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#224

Post by icebraining » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:24 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #94

dx87 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could just remove it if they can't tell, same way a bouncer will throw you out of a bar if you don't have ID. I don't know why people are giving social media companies a pass on what goes on just because their job is hard. Nobody is holding a gun to their head and telling them that they need to run an unmanageable platform, they wanted this many users.

Maybe they do remove it if they can't tell. We don't know. Maybe they contacted the source of the video and they confirmed the age of the actors. Then what? I didn't even know that Twitter had porn at all. It seems like it might be in their best interest to remove it altogether. There are sites that specialize in it, that I'd have to imagine are better sources for most people.

We do know, at least if we take the accuser's word as true:

> A support agent followed up and asked for a copy of Doe’s ID so they could prove it was him and after the teen complied, there was no response for a week, the family claims. (...) Finally on Jan. 28, Twitter replied to Doe and said they wouldn’t be taking down the material, which had already racked up over 167,000 views and 2,223 retweets, the suit states. “Thanks for reaching out. We’ve reviewed the content, and didn’t find a violation of our policies, so no action will be taken at this time,” the response reads, according to the lawsuit.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#225

Post by icebraining » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:26 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #40

This is critical to Twitter's crappy stance. They want to act like a neutral party to avoid liability (like common carrier status of US telco), yet they also want to censor what and who they feel like (via their ToS and being a private company). Their stance is inconsistent and this type of case may lead to resolution of that. Unfortunately I predict they will just add a few illegal things to their ToS as being twitt…

This is not true, they have no liability even if they don't act (or pretend to act) neutrally.

And this case doesn't really have anything to do with their ToS, they removal of CP is required by law.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#226

Post by kenjackson » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:36 PM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #224

kenjackson wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe they do remove it if they can't tell. We don't know. Maybe they contacted the source of the video and they confirmed the age of the actors. Then what? I didn't even know that Twitter had porn at all. It seems like it might be in their best interest to remove it altogether. There are sites that specialize in it, that I'd have to imagine are better sources for most people.

We do know, at least if we take the accuser's word as true: > A support agent followed up and asked for a copy of Doe’s ID so they could prove it was him and after the teen complied, there was no response for a week, the family claims. (...) Finally on Jan. 28, Twitter replied to Doe and said they wouldn’t be taking down the material, which had already racked up over 167,000 views and 2,223 retweets, the suit states.…

We still don't know what Twitter knows. It's not even clear if Twitter gave a more comprehensive reason.

That said, if we assume what the accuser said and implied is true, then Twitter was criminally negligent IMO (IANAL). But I guess we'll find out in court.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#227

Post by sangnoir » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 5:53 PM UTC

testrun wrote: post #178

jjk166 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't assume guilt until proven innocent

I think you meant 'we assume innocence until proven guilty'

You're both saying the same thing - only that parent used the negated form of your statement.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#228

Post by tayo42 » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 6:08 PM UTC

athms wrote: post #202

tayo42 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's misleading to compare an ideology with an actual organization like proud boys like he did above. That's something right wing media does

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#229

Post by pupdogg » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 6:53 PM UTC

tayo42 wrote: post #190

DevKoala wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> American politics have gotten pulled so far to the right, center is pretty right wing. Idk how you can deny that? 80+ million of us Americans voted in record numbers for the left leaning candidate, our biggest media platforms promote left leaning message, right wing individuals have been censored, etc. Maybe not everybody in the United States is left leaning, but I wouldn’t call this a politically right leaning cou…

your not reading what I'm writing left: |---|---| right left: |-------|-------|right edit: i cant get the lines to line up, the beggining of the first line is supposed to be like two dashes over the right has gotten more extreme than the left has gotten extreme. if you think your in the middle, your really just right wing becasue the right has gotten insane. thats my point. your free to prove me wrong when ever by ex…

tayo42 i'm sorry to say this but I genuinely think that you're out of touch with the reality. maybe you ought to get out some more and actually interact with people.

Re: Twitter sued for allegedly refusing to remove child porn

#230

Post by halfmatthalfcat » Fri, Jan 22, 2021, 7:12 PM UTC

bobthepanda wrote: post #222

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Who is arguing for "banning all social media" in this comment chain? You're attacking a strawman. We need high regulation of recommended content, probably by moving recommendations out of the scope of section 230. Pointing to a not banned but extremely highly regulated decriminalized sector kind of speaks for itself. It's not like I could go on a San Francisco street corner tomorrow and start selling pot like a paper…

The parent comment (the original one I responded to) said that if we can't find an equitable solution to "regulate them out of existence". That's what I was arguing against.