Elon Musk Buys Twitter

[Edge-]

"good friends"
"unbanned all"
"keeps promoting"
"huge"
"hugely"
"obvious"

That's a lot of just emotional, overdramatized trigger words to win whatever argument you feel you need to win. That's what I see more and more of and it gets really tiresome.

My observations are not your observations.

None of those words are inherently emotional, and even if they were...and? What's overdramatized about "good"? Or "all"? Or "keeps promoting?"

This post reads incredibly dishonest and is difficult to take seriously. Like you're not actually interested in discussion at all or something.

[Benggaul]

None of those words are inherently emotional, and even if they were...and? What's overdramatized about "good"? Or "all"? Or "keeps promoting?"

This post reads incredibly dishonest and is difficult to take seriously. Like you're not actually interested in discussion at all or something.

Man if those are examples of words that trigger them then it's no wonder they have so little of any value to say. Imagine having to thumb through a thesaurus every time you want to get a point across because words like "all" or "good" or "obvious" are triggering you. Must be tough.

Or, as you mention, they're just incredibly dishonest. Occam's razor gives us the answer here.

[Draco-Onis]

Musk seems to actively go after those accounts. He permanently suspended the account of that person who made a pedo flag, saying that it's not tolerated on the platform.

But that's one account this one I can say it's just incompetence, twitter's restoration of account system has allowed a flood of pedos back on the platform. Twitter simply doesn't have the manpower or the technology to vet those accounts before restoring them. I can say the bigots, Neo Nazis and conspiracy theorists are intentional since he retweets and tweets that shit himself, the pedos is the effect of him gutting twitter.

[Ivanstone]

Musk seems to actively go after those accounts. He permanently suspended the account of that person who made a pedo flag, saying that it's not tolerated on the platform.

Considering he slashed moderation I don’t see how that’s possible. Taking down one account is nothing considering the ease of adding a new one.

- - - Updated - - -

the pedos is the effect of him gutting twitter.

I wonder how many people on Cajsa Lilliehook’s predator list have active twitter accounts.

Entry #1013, Daniel W. Merrick, appears to have two. To be fair I don’t know if he ever posted his huge trove of child porn (880 charges) to twitter.

[Edge-]

Again, tho, can you maybe produce some credible sources to this claim? I keep seeing certain users saying that there's this "flood of pedos" getting back in and taking over Twitter, but I have yet to see anything produced to support that. All I have is my anecdotal evidence and it does not match that experience.

https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/07/...problem-worse/

You're welcome to read the article, and the linked articles within that go into more detail.

[Draco-Onis]

Again, tho, can you maybe produce some credible sources to this claim? I keep seeing certain users saying that there's this "flood of pedos" getting back in and taking over Twitter, but I have yet to see anything produced to support that. All I have is my anecdotal evidence and it does not match that experience.

Again this is not intentional its because Musk has gutted Twitter's ability to moderate and verify. He made these problems worse with the addition of the blue check mark. That's why the EU has sent him a warning about his failure to follow to moderate, Twitter had a pedo problem before Musk. The difference is that under Musk is that they can't combat them anymore.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/e...ft-2022-11-30/

[Edge-]

This is a blog, -Edge

If you're not interested in having people provide you the links you claim to want then you shouldn't ask for them.

[Lenonis]

It’s actually been nice.

Whooo boy does that say a whole lot about you and the type of content you consume.

[gondrin]

Do you have a credible link that confirms this?

Most places that even remotely support or condone far right speech in any way tend to lose advertisers and revenue at a fast pace. To give examples, look at the general advertising done on Fox News. Mostly gold sellers, reverse home mortgages and the like. Take the Blaze. Same thing but added in some advertisements from religious organizations. I could go on with any far-right website or channel.

The VAST majority of businesses do not want to deal with the far right in any way and will go out of their way to not advertise on any site or channel that actually supports any far-right speech.

[Draco-Onis]

I said credible. Blogs are not credible -- you know this, and if I was to do the same to you, you'd call that shit out too.

Click on the link the blog has references to several articles, it's weird you dismissing it offhand without even reading it.

[Edge-]

I said credible. Blogs are not credible -- you know this, and if I was to do the same to you, you'd call that shit out too.

If only you had the strength and fortitude to click the link to see what they were reporting on.

If that's too tall and challenging a hurdle to clear than I fear you must live with your ignorance on the topic. It's ultimately your choice, you're making the decision to reject a link providing you the evidence you claim to want. Almost as if you didn't want any evidence in the first place.

[NED funded]

I said credible. Blogs are not credible -- you know this, and if I was to do the same to you, you'd call that shit out too.

IDK why they linked the blog and not the nyt article contained inside of it

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/06/t...sex-abuse.html

In the first few hours of searching, the computer program found a number of images previously identified as abusive — and accounts offering to sell more. The Times flagged the posts without viewing any images, sending the web addresses to services run by Microsoft and the Canadian center.

One account in late December offered a discounted “Christmas pack” of photos and videos. That user tweeted a partly obscured image of a child who had been abused from about age 8 through adolescence. Twitter took down the post five days later, but only after the Canadian center sent the company repeated notices.

In all, the computer program found imagery of 10 victims appearing over 150 times across multiple accounts, most recently on Thursday. The accompanying tweets often advertised child rape videos and included links to encrypted platforms.

Alex Stamos, the director of the Stanford Internet Observatory and the former top security executive at Facebook, found the results alarming. “Considering the focus Musk has put on child safety, it is surprising they are not doing the basics,” he said.

Separately, to confirm The Times’s findings, the Canadian center ran a test to determine how often one video series involving known victims appeared on Twitter. Analysts found 31 different videos shared by more than 40 accounts, some of which were retweeted and liked thousands of times. The videos depicted a young teenager who had been extorted online to engage in sexual acts with a prepubescent child over a period of months.

The center also did a broader scan against the most explicit videos in their database. There were more than 260 hits, with more than 174,000 likes and 63,000 retweets

.

Seems damning. Id like a progress update on this one from twitter

[Draco-Onis]

I mean, I wouldn’t say the NYT is a credible source.

You know it rings hollow to say the New York Times is not credible when you claimed young people are rioting and looting major US cities without any evidence.

[Edge-]

I mean, I wouldn’t say the NYT is a credible source.

R
O
F
L

So boring and predictable at this point.

Just admit you don't actually want a source. You don't want the information you said you wanted earlier. You'd rather continue believing your fictions.

[NED funded]

I mean, I wouldn’t say the NYT is a credible source. They often put out hit pieces that show bias and push intended narratives. I’d definitely like to read more on how they collected this data, and if it was really done in good faith, as I’m not seeing much context in the article.

To assess the company’s claims of progress, The Times created an individual Twitter account and wrote an automated computer program that could scour the platform for the content without displaying the actual images, which are illegal to view. The material wasn’t difficult to find. In fact, Twitter helped promote it through its recommendation algorithm — a feature that suggests accounts to follow based on user activity.

This is how they collected the data and they confirm it with separate institutions:

Separately, to confirm The Times’s findings, the Canadian center ran a test to determine how often one video series involving known victims appeared on Twitter. Analysts found 31 different videos shared by more than 40 accounts, some of which were retweeted and liked thousands of times. The videos depicted a young teenager who had been extorted online to engage in sexual acts with a prepubescent child over a period of months

I dont think they are lying or acting in bad faith. They describe how it has been getting better since but it's worse than before the Musk takeover.

[Benggaul]

For those of you keeping score...

Anti-LGBT propaganda video posted to Twitter by a host of bad-faith shitbirds: eye-opening
Evidence of the decline of Twitter and rise of Nazi/pedophile content from the NYT and other journalistic outlets: questionable

When someone tells you who they are, listen.

[Edge-]

You'd be surprised just how much Americans are spoonfed by their own media. You get entirely different perspectives in Europe -- it's why I prefer watching/reading those.

And as I previously said, I'm interested in the data and future preventative-steps made by Musk. I prefer to not get angry and make claims without it fully being investigated and that info released.

I find this all highly suspect given that you were provided these links and chose to respond multiple times to make it clear you had no interest in actually reading anything about them.

We're not going to chew your food and feed it to you like a baby bird. You sometimes have to chew the food yourself when others do the little game where the link is a airplane coming in for a landing and place it right in your mouth.

I agree, but was this video posted deliberately to attract these pedo's (which many are trying to suggest) or was this a fuck-up in the algorithm (or whatever it was) that was promised to be investigated and corrected?

Which are we going to believe? Cause the latter makes more sense to me, rather than some conspiracy that Musk is trying to give pedos and racists a much louder voice.

I still struggle to believe you're participating in good faith when a huge amount of the discussion in this thread, including recently, has been about how laying off massive numbers of employees including a lot of the compliance and trust an safety folks, that maintained the systems and did the actual work of trying to take down and combat the spread of child sex abuse images etc. and how that's had a negative effect on Twitters ability to do so. How intentional policy and staffing changes by Elom, after his acquisition, have had the predicted and warned about result that it would increase that kind of content on the platform.

But hey, there apparently seems to be an endless line of proud know-nothings who are happy to argue otherwise while refusing to inform themselves on the topic they're discussing.

[Pannonian]

https://www.newsweek.com/twitter-los...unding-1804584

Newsweek valid? Or are we already at the point that a credible source is only the one that reinforces your own bias and gut-feeling?

Edit after your Edit:

Ah nevermind, when confronted with facts you're running to apologize for scum. My bad to think you'd engage in good faith here...

[Edge-]

We’re supposed to be mad that Musk found a way to run the company without as many employees?

I’m not mad.

He did find a way to run the company with fewer employees! While being warned that pursuing such a path would result in more hate-speech and child abuse of the platform.

And lo and behold it has resulted in more hate speech and child abuse on the platform, the thing you say isn't happening as a result of Elom's intentional policy and staffing decisions.

Does reality hold any meaning to you? Do words hold any meaning to you?

[Ivanstone]

You get entirely different perspectives in Europe

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65733969

Hmmm…
European source.
Twitter does not want to meet Europe’s disinformation standards.

Is this perspective different enough for you?