Author Topic: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data  (Read 12346 times)

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #30 on: June 05, 2020, 12:50:12 pm »
Friday, 5th June 2o2o
BLOCKED!!!
by Associated Press






(WASHINGTON, D.C.) - Twitter has blocked a trunk campaign video tribute to George Floyd over a copyright claim, in a move that adds to tensions between the social media platform and a common federal employee, one of its most widely followed users.

The company put a label on a video posted by the trunk's account that said,


“This media has been disabled in response to a claim by the copyright owner.”


The video was still up on trunk’s YouTube channel and includes pictures of Floyd, whose death sparked world wide protests, at the start.

“Per our copyright policy, we respond to valid copyright complaints sent to us by a copyright owner or their authorized representatives,” Twitter said in a statement.

The three minute and 45 second clip is a montage of photos and videos of peaceful marches and police officers hugging protesters interspersed with some scenes of burning buildings and vandalism, set to gentle piano music and trunk babbling incoherently.

It’s the latest action that Twitter has taken against trunk, who has threatened to retaliate against social media companies.



















Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #31 on: June 29, 2020, 07:37:22 pm »
Monday, 29th June 2o2o
BLOCKED AGAIN!!!
by David Thier




Popular video game streaming website Twitch has temporarily suspended team trunk, the account tied to trunk’s campaign.

When contacted for comment, a Twitch representative said that the account had been suspended for violating the company’s policy on hateful conduct.

"Hateful conduct is not allowed on Twitch. In line with our policies, trunk’s channel has been issued a temporary suspension from Twitch for comments made on stream, and the offending content has been removed."

The company pointed to two examples of offending statements from recent and older rallies:

1. 2016 campaign rally, recently rebroadcast on Twitch: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people. But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people.”


2. Tulsa Rally:  “Hey, it’s 1:00 o’clock in the morning and a very tough, I’ve used the word on occasion, hombre, a very tough hombre is breaking into the window of a young woman whose husband is away as a traveling salesman or whatever he may do. And you call 911 and they say, “I’m sorry, this number’s no longer working.” By the way, you have many cases like that, many, many, many. Whether it’s a young woman, an old woman, a young man or an old man and you’re sleeping.”


trunk has been increasingly been at odds with the social media networks that have proved such a key component to his rise to power and have continued to be crucial parts of how he communicates with the public.

Twitter has flagged several of trunk’s tweets for misleading or dangerous information over the past few months, drawing ire from trunk and his henchmen.

fakebook has taken a more hands off policy, refusing to flag or remove some of the same posts that Twitter took action against.

The social media company has faced significant backlash for its decisions, facing a broad advertiser retreat from companies ranging from Unilever to Starbucks.

The company unveiled new labels for some posts in response.

In the past few weeks, a string of sexual misconduct and harassment accusations have rocked the world of Twitch and video game streaming, leading to renewed promises from the service to become more aggressive with bans and punishments, even against large accounts.

Last Friday, Twitch also suddenly banned Dr. Disrespect, one the service’s most popular streamers.

















Would You Like To Know More?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2020/06/29/twitch-suspends-donald-trumps-campaign-account/#65c3f60d7531

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #32 on: June 29, 2020, 07:54:19 pm »
Monday, 29th June 2o2o
--- AND AGAIN!!!
by Bobby Allyn






Reddit announced on Monday that it is shutting down a forum dedicated to trunk's most ardent fanatics, saying it repeatedly violates the online platform's rules against harassment, hate speech and content manipulation.

The community forum, known as a subreddit, was called The_donald and had nearly 800,000 users.

trunk himself has been known to share memes that posted to The_donald and other parts of Reddit.

Long a magnet for conspiracy theories and sharp attacks on trunk's critics, The_donald has faced backlash before.

Reddit has taken action over content encouraging violence and had threatened to block the subreddit completely if the moderators — who are volunteers — did not take down the abusive material.

Now, officials at Reddit have determined that the forum where die-hard trunk fans congregate online cannot police itself.

"Reddit is a place for creating community and belonging, not for attacking marginalized or vulnerable groups of people. Everyone has a right to use Reddit free of harassment, bullying, and threats of violence," the company said in new content rules it unveiled on Monday.

Reddit, which is the sixth most popular website in the U.S., announced the crackdown on The_donald as part of a wider enforcement of its hate speech policies.

It said it was banning some 2,000 Reddit communities, including the left-leaning subreddit Chapo Trap House, over rule violations.

Reddit said the vast majority of the subreddits affected were already inactive.

Reddit has introduced eight additional rules for its content, including measures intended to prevent harassment and respect personal privacy.

Examples of the type of content Reddit will ban include "mocking people with physical disabilities" and "describing a racial minority as sub-human and inferior to the racial majority," the company said in a statement.

"Communities and users that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned," Reddit said in its new policy guidelines.

After Reddit closed The_donald, its former moderators took to Twitter to point out that many trunk loyalists have already abandoned Reddit for an alternative site known as thedonald.win.

Geared toward conservatives, it looks and functions similar to Reddit but without the rules against hate speech and violence.

"Well, Reddit accomplished one thing today. They got people to go there for the first time in months to see if we were really banned. Myself included!" one former moderator tweeted.

Reddit is the latest social media company to announce new limits on what users can post.

It is part of a broad shift away from the hands-off approach long embraced by online platforms that have claimed to be neutral in the face of whatever users publish.

Now, Reddit and other popular sites that help define political discourse are drawing lines that the companies say cannot be crossed on speech that glorifies violence or hate.


Twitter has placed labels on trunk tweets deemed to include factual distortions or be seen as inciting violence.

fakebook, which had been reluctant to take any action on trunk's posts, recently has removed trunk content.

Last week, it announced it will be placing warning labels on problematic posts and will remove content that incites violence or attempts to suppress voting.

fakebook's policy reversal arrived as a growing number of major advertisers, including Starbucks, Ford Motor Co. and Cola-Cola, join a boycott of the social network that's meant to draw attention to hate speech and misinformation on the platform.

Snap, which owns Snapchat, has said it will no longer promote trunk's account after determining that comments to the president's posts could be seen as encouraging violence
.

Also on Monday, Twitch, the Amazon-owned site for streaming games, said it temporarily suspended trunk's account, according to a Twitch spokesperson.

The decision was made following the president rebroadcasting on his Twitch channel a 2015 campaign speech in which he disparaged Mexican immigrants and remarks he made at a recent Tulsa, Oklahoma, rally linking Hispanics to crime.

"Hateful conduct is considered a zero-tolerance violation," said the Twitch spokesperson.















Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #33 on: October 15, 2020, 08:02:09 pm »
Thursday, 15th October 2o2o
---AND AGAIN!!!
by Elizabeth Culliford in London and Nandita Bose in Washington; Additional reporting by Munsif Vengattil in Bengaluru, David Shepardson and Susan Cornwell in Washington and Katie Paul in San Francisco; Editing by Shinjini Ganguli, Lisa Shumaker, Grant McCool & Nandita Bose






Individual-1’s re-election campaign’s Twitter account was briefly restricted on Thursday, causing an outcry from republican lawmakers who accused social media companies of acting like “speech police” and vowing to hold Twitter responsible.

Twitter temporarily blocked Individual-1's account from sending tweets after it posted a video about Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden’s son that it said violated its rules.

The video referred to a New York Post story from Wednesday that contained alleged details of Hunter Biden’s business dealings with a Ukrainian energy company and said the former vice president had met with an adviser of the company.

Biden campaign spokesman Andrew Bates said in a statement that republican-led Senate committees have previously concluded that Joe Biden engaged in no wrongdoing related to Ukraine.

He also denied such a meeting had taken place.

A Twitter spokesman said earlier on Thursday that Individual-1's account, and the accounts of the Executive Mansion Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany and the New York Post, had been blocked from tweeting because of the company’s policies on hacked materials and posting private information.

He said the accounts may need to delete the rule-breaking posts to continue tweeting.

The Individual-1 campaign, with 2.2 million followers, was sending tweets again on Thursday afternoon.

It said in a new tweet it was “re-posting the video Twitter doesn’t want you to watch.”

A Twitter spokesman told Reuters that the site would not take action as alterations to the video meant it no longer violated its policies.

“It’s going to all end up in a big lawsuit and there are things that can happen that are very severe that I’d rather not see happen, but it’s probably going to have to,” Individual-1 said when asked about the move by Twitter.

McEnany likewise began tweeting again on Thursday, saying she regained access after deleting her post on the report.

Both fakebook Inc and Twitter took proactive steps on Wednesday to restrict dissemination of the Post story in the hours after it was published.

fakebook reduced how often the story shows up in users’ news feeds and elsewhere on the platform, an action spokesman Andy Stone said the company takes temporarily pending fact checker review “if we have signals that a piece of content is false.”

fakebook did not respond to Reuters questions on whether its fact-checking partners were working on rating the Post’s story.

Twitter prohibited its users from posting links to two New York Post articles about Hunter Biden, saying they violated its policies against posting private information and “hacked materials.”

But Twitter’s Chief Executive Jack Dorsey tweeted on Wednesday “our communication around our actions on the @nypost article was not great. And blocking URL sharing via tweet or DM with zero context as to why we’re blocking: unacceptable.”

A Twitter spokesman declined to answer Reuters questions on whether Mr. Dorsey had been involved in the decisions on these restrictions on Wednesday or Thursday.

republicans on the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee responded to Twitter’s actions by tweeting a link to a copy of the New York Post’s story on its website.

Twitter blocked the link but later said this had been in error and reversed the action.

The @nypost has not tweeted in over a day, suggesting that they are still blocked from posting.

A spokeswoman for the New York Post declined to comment, other than referring Reuters to the Post’s own coverage.

republican lawmakers slammed the social media companies’ actions on Thursday.

U.S. Senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said the blocking of the story was “reprehensible” and that there should be no “speech police” in the United States.

After Twitter imposed the restrictions, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee moved to subpoena Dorsey.

Committee Chairman lindsey graham and republican senators ted cruz and Josh Hawley said the committee will vote on sending the subpoena on Tuesday, October 20th and plans to have Dorsey in front of the committee by October 23rd.

Hawley also called for sending a subpoena to fakebook.

“We’re going to finally have an accounting that is long overdue,” graham said.

“This to me crystallizes the problem better than anything I could think of.”

Senator Marco Rubio urged Federal Communications Commission Chairman Ajit Pai to re-examine Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

The CEOs of Twitter, fakebook and Alphabet Inc’s Google are set to appear before the Senate Commerce Committee later this month at a hearing to discuss Section 230 - a legal immunity which offers tech companies protection from liability over content posted by users and enables them to act in “good faith” to remove objectionable content.

Pai said on Thursday the agency will move forward to set new rules to clarify the meaning of the provision.

The calls to reform Section 230 and penalize tech companies have been intensifying but it is unlikely there will be action on the law by Congress this year.





Would You Like To Know More?
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-twitter/twitter-briefly-restricts-trump-campaign-account-republicans-decry-companys-actions-idUSKBN2702C4

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #34 on: November 21, 2020, 02:22:55 pm »
Saturday, 21st November 2o2o
Twitter to automatically transfer @POTUS handle from Indy-1 to Joe Biden on Inauguration Day
by Kelly Tyko, Michael Collins and Jessica Guynn






This is one part of the upcoming presidential transition that will happen automatically – even without a concession.

Twitter says it will automatically transfer the @POTUS Twitter handle from Individual-1 to President-elect Joe Biden the moment Biden is sworn in on Inauguration Day, according to Politico.

“Twitter is actively preparing to support the transition of Executive Mansion institutional Twitter accounts on January 20th, 2021,” Twitter spokesperson Nick Pacilio told Politico.

“As we did for the presidential transition in 2017, this process is being done in close consultation with the National Archives and Records Administration.”

Individual-1 regularly tweets using his ___________ handle and then the @POTUS account retweets many.

He has not conceded the election, which while not required is a tradition.

Several other verified government accounts associated with the presidency including @whitehouse, @VP and @FLOTUS, also will be handed over to the Biden administration, Politico reported.

Biden turned 78 on Friday, two months before he will take the oath of office as the nation's 46th president.
























Would You Like To Know More?
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2020/11/21/twitter-potus-handle-transfer-trump-biden-inauguration-day/6374818002/

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2021, 07:42:40 pm »
Saturday, 6th February Two Thousand and Twenty One
Twitter permanently suspends Gateway Pundit founder's account
by Celine Castronuovo







Twitter on Saturday issued a permanent suspension for the account run by Jim Hoft, founder and editor-in-chief of far-right news website Gateway Pundit, for violations of its "civic integrity policy."

A Twitter spokesperson confirmed the news to The Hill, citing "repeated violations" of its policy that bars users from tweeting messages "for the purpose of manipulating or interfering in elections or other civic processes," including misinformation regarding the outcome of an election.

The policy includes a series of punishments depending on the frequency of violations, with five or more strikes resulting in a permanent suspension.

Gateway Pundit was among the conservative media outlets that had advanced unsubstantiated claims from Individual-1 and his allies of widespread voting irregularities and voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

According to an archived version of Hoft's account, his most recent tweets came on January 29th, when he shared criticisms of COVID-19 restrictions and claims that certain ballots cast for President Biden were illegal.

Bloomberg reported Saturday that Hoft was photographed at Individual-1 rally on January 6th, ahead of the violent mob attack at the Capitol, in which several people were killed amid the chaos.

Last month, CNN reported that Gateway Pundit was among the groups utilizing christian fundraising website GiveSendGo.com in efforts related to challenge the results of the presidential election.

Hoft's outlet raised more than $135,000 to investigate alleged voter fraud in Michigan and to "take on the tech giant censorship of conservative voices."

Saturday's Twitter suspension comes as one of the latest issued by Twitter in connection with users repeating unsupported claims of a "rigged" election in favor of Biden more than two weeks after he was inaugurated.

Twitter on Tuesday officially suspended the MyPillow company Twitter account after founder Mike Lindell used it to make several posts attacking Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and promoting claims of election fraud.

The move came just one week after Lindell's personal account was suspended.

Lindell among other claims, has stated that problems with Dominion Voting Systems machines led to irregularities in ballots.

Dominion Voting Systems has filed a $1.3 billion defamation lawsuit against Rudy Giuliani, Individual-1's personal attorney, over false claims about the company, and also sent a letter to Lindell threatening him with legal action for leading a "misinformation campaign."






















Would You Like To Know More?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/twitter-permanently-suspends-gateway-pundit-founder-s-account/ar-BB1dsmKx?ocid=msedgntp

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #36 on: March 24, 2021, 05:32:22 pm »
Wednesday, 24th March Twenty One (orignally published Friday, 5th March Twenty One)
What's An NFT? And Why Are People Paying Millions To Buy Them?
by Bobby Allyn







The artist Grimes recently sold a bunch of NFTs for nearly $6 million.

An NFT of LeBron James making a historic dunk for the Lakers garnered more than $200,000.

The band Kings of Leon is releasing its new album in the form of an NFT.

At the auction house Christie's, bids on an NFT by the artist Beeple are already reaching into the millions.

And on Friday, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey listed his first-ever tweet as an NFT.

Safe to say, what started as an Internet hobby among a certain subset of tech and finance nerds has catapulted to the mainstream.

Which leads to some obvious questions.

Chief among them: What on earth is an NFT?

NFT stands for what now?


It stands for "nonfungible token."

Nonfungible, meaning you can't exchange it for another thing of equal value.

A $10 bill can be exchanged for two $5 bills.

One bar of gold can be swapped for another bar of gold of the same size.

Those things are fungible. An NFT, though, is one of a kind.

The token refers to a unit of currency on the blockchain.

It's how cryptocurrency like Bitcoin is bought and sold.

"Remember those days where people would line up for the newest Nike Air Jordan sneakers at the physical store? This is the new digital equivalent," said Katie Haun, a general partner at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.

"It's everything that brings together culture, and it's also a bet on the future of e-commerce," Haun said.

Still.

What exactly do you get when you buy an NFT?

This question unleashes a fury of debate among NFT enthusiasts.

The answer is not simple.

Are you buying what amounts to an Internet trophy?

Clout?

A feeling?


A digital collector's item?

Perhaps, but you are also purchasing a kind of bar code, almost a certificate of authenticity that serves as proof that a certain version of something is uniquely yours.

"The underlying thing that you're buying is code that manifests as images," said Donna Redel, who teaches courses on crypto-digital assets at Fordham Law School.

"You're buying a different format of art."

But note that when you buy an NFT, you're usually not getting the copyright or trademark to the item.

And just because you own an NFT doesn't mean there aren't endless other versions of that thing on the Internet.

There will be.

It's the Internet.

Still, NFT enthusiasts say owning a piece of code in a blockchain has shown itself to be an incredibly valuable thing.

"You're not buying the picture," said Jake Brukhman, founder of cryptocurrency investment company CoinFund.

"You're buying the property rights to the picture."

Why don't people just right-click on an image instead and save it to their desktop?

That's free.

True.

But like with other collectables, whether it's baseball cards, rare books or fine art, having an original is special.

Take CryptoPunks, pixelated avatars that have fetched millions of dollars.

Sure, you could download one of the alien avatars, but collectors would not consider it authentic.

A real alien CryptoPunk costs, on average, $900,000.

To be clear, there's no visual difference between an original and a copied version.

And to make it even more confusing, not all NFTs are originals.

Many are the digital equivalent of a reprint.

But in this case, the reprint has what is essentially a unique bar code, or "token," on the blockchain, which is a type of decentralized record-keeping system.

In other words, instead of one institution, like a bank, having a ledger of transactions, a blockchain uses a vast network of computers that all hold each other accountable on a shared public record.

That makes it hard to remove an NFT from the Web entirely.

It also means there's a way to trace an NFT's origin and transaction history.

How do you buy or sell an NFT?

It takes some steps.

First, you usually have to buy a cryptocurrency, like Ethereum.

That's a process in and of itself.

But once you do, you can go to an NFT marketplace.

Some of the popular ones include KnownOrigin, Rarible and OpenSea.

There, you can bid on an NFT and wait for the auction to end.

If no one outbids you, you get the bragging rights.

How do you make an NFT?

Log on to one of the NFT marketplaces and upload a file.

This process is called "minting" an NFT.

You'll usually be asked if it's a one of a kind, if there are multiple copies or if it's part of a collection.

(A quick glance at an NFT marketplace shows just how easy the process is — maybe too easy. Some people are trying to sell tweets and even colors as NFTs.)

Once you're done, collectors can start bidding.

Digital artists can build a royalty into their NFTs, even for future sales, which is why many artists see promise in NFTs: It can cut out the middleman and open up a new way to make money.

If you're not interested in buying or selling them, why should you care?

As tens of millions of dollars in transactions pour in for NFTs, enthusiasts say, NFTs will soon expand beyond trading art, music, video clips and memes.

One startup lets people use their NFTs as collateral for loans.

Silicon Valley investors say the moneymaking possibilities in the NFT world are limitless.

"At the time the iPhone was created, nobody would've thought that one of the killer apps was going to be hailing a ride," said Haun of Andreessen Horowitz.

What are the risks?

There's always a chance that a tech frenzy is a passing fad or is stoking a speculative bubble.

If you spend a pretty penny on an NFT and then enthusiasm and values suddenly plummet, you could be in for a big loss.

But NFT backers say the system's built-in scarcity should keep values up, as long as the surge of interest persists.

Be cautious about works that appear to be created by famous artists.

NFTs resembling pieces by the artist Banksy have netted $900,000, but they have turned out to be fakes.

Then there is the environmental impact of NFTs, which has attracted real scrutiny.

The computing power required to operate the underlying blockchain system of NFTs is immense.

By some estimates, one crypto transaction could gobble up more power than the average U.S. household uses in a single day.

One artist estimated that generating six NFT pieces consumed more electricity than his entire physical studio did in two years.

"The energy production infrastructure is out of our sight," wrote Brussels-based artist Joanie Lemercier.

"And we often have the feeling that electricity is abundant, limitless and we disregard its impact."





















« Last Edit: March 24, 2021, 05:51:49 pm by Battle »

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #37 on: April 05, 2021, 07:46:33 am »
Monday, 5th April Twenty One
DISMISSED!
by Melissa Quinn








(Washington, D.C.) — The Supreme Court on Monday ordered a dispute over individual-1's ability to block his critics on Twitter to be tossed out, bringing the battle over individual-1's Twitter account to a close as he is no longer in office and has since been banned from the platform.

The high court vacated a decision from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals against the acting-president and sent the case back to the lower court with instructions to dismiss it as moot.

The New York-based 2nd Circuit found individual-1's decision to block seven users from interacting with his Twitter account was unconstitutional, as the space associated with the former acting-president's account was a designated public forum.

In an opinion concurring with the court's decision to throw out the case, clarence thomas said the dispute "highlights the principal legal difficulty that surrounds digital platforms — namely, that applying old doctrines to new digital platforms is rarely straightforward."

"As Twitter made clear, the right to cut off speech lies most powerfully in the hands of private digital platforms," thomas wrote.

"The extent to which that power matters for purposes of the First Amendment and the extent to which that power could lawfully be modified raise interesting and important questions.

This petition, unfortunately, affords us no opportunity to confront them."

individual-1 created his Twitter account in 2009 and amassed more than 88 million followers.

Over the course of his monarchy, individual-1 used the forum to air his grievances on an array of issues and announce official policies of his administration and personnel changes.

Twitter, however, permanently banned individual-1 from the platform in the wake of the January 6th assault on the U.S. Capitol.

Between May and June 2017, the acting-president blocked Twitter accounts registered to seven people who were critical of him and his policies, which kept them from being able to interact with his account.

In response to individual-1's action, the Twitter users filed a lawsuit against the acting-president and Dan Scavino, the former White House director of social media, arguing the blocking of their accounts violated the First Amendment.

A federal district court in New York ruled in favor of the users, finding that the blocking of their accounts was unconstitutional.

The 2nd Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling, concluding that individual-1's use of the account during his presidency was "governmental" as opposed to "private," as his tweets often involved official matters.

In asking the Supreme Court to take up the dispute, the Justice Department argued the 2nd Circuit's "novel" ruling would "jeopardize the ability of public officials — from a real president of the United States to a village councilperson — to insulate their social-media accounts from harassment, trolling, or hate speech without invasive judicial oversight."

"By ignoring the critical distinction between the acting-president's (sometimes) official statements on Twitter and his always personal decision to block respondents from his own account, the opinion blurs the line between state action and private conduct — notwithstanding this court's repeated and recent exhortations to heed that line carefully in applying the First Amendment," former Acting Solicitor General Jeffrey Wall told the Supreme Court.

The Justice Department, however, asked the Supreme Court in January to dismiss the case as moot, noting individual-1 was sued in his official capacity and would be leaving office.


















Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #38 on: April 05, 2021, 09:13:19 am »
Monday, 5th April Twenty One
His Argument For Making fakebook, Twitter and Google utilities
by Issie Lapowsky




Last fall, clarence thomas argued that it was time to rein in Section 230 immunity.

Now, thomas is laying out an argument for why companies like fakebook, Twitter and Google should be regulated as utilities.

On Monday, the Supreme Court vacated a lower court ruling in finding that individual-1 had acted unconstitutionally by blocking people on Twitter.

That case, which the justices deemed moot, hinged on the idea that the individual-1 account was a public forum run by the acting-president of the United States, and therefore, was constitutionally prohibited from stifling private speech.

In his concurrence, thomas agrees with the decision, but argues that, in fact, Twitter's recent ban of the individual-1 account suggests that it's platforms themselves, not the government officials on them, that hold all the power.

"As Twitter made clear, the right to cut off speech lies most powerfully in the hands of private digital platforms," thomas writes.

"The extent to which that power matters for purposes of the First Amendment and the extent to which that power could lawfully be modified raise interesting and important questions."

thomas argues that some digital platforms are "sufficiently akin" to common carriers like telephone companies.

"A traditional telephone company laid physical wires to create a network connecting people," thomas writes.

"Digital platforms lay information infrastructure that can be controlled in much the same way."

thomas argues that while private companies aren't subject to the First Amendment, common carriers are unique to other private businesses in that they do not have the "right to exclude."

thomas suggests that large tech platforms with substantial market power should be bound by the same restrictions.

"If the analogy between common carriers and digital platforms is correct, then an answer may arise for dissatisfied platform users who would appreciate not being blocked: laws that restrict the platform's right to exclude," thomas writes.

Such a restriction would substantially curb tech giants' ability to moderate content, a proposal that both tech giants and those on the left who want to see more aggressive content moderation online would almost certainly reject.

thomas goes on to describe the sheer scope of fakebook and Google's market power, citing fakebook's roughly 3 billion users and Google's 90% market share in search.

"It changes nothing that these platforms are not the sole means for distributing speech or information. A person always could choose to avoid the toll bridge or train and instead swim the Charles River or hike the Oregon Trail," thomas writes.

"But in assessing whether a company exercises substantial market power, what matters is whether the alternatives are comparable. For many of today's digital platforms, nothing is."

thomas states that in order for an account like individual-1 to be truly classified as government controlled, "the power of a platform to unilaterally remove a government account" would have to be "reduced."

thomas acknowledges that it would be up to "a legislature" to impose such a restriction and that the Twitter blocking case before the court didn't offer an opportunity to grapple with those questions.

But, he writes:

"We will soon have no choice but to address how our legal doctrines apply to highly concentrated, privately owned information infrastructure such as digital platforms."









« Last Edit: April 05, 2021, 10:13:11 am by Battle »

Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #39 on: July 28, 2021, 08:30:17 am »
Wednesday, 27th July  Twenty One
Black woman's car buying experience turns sour with racist fakebook post
by Michael Lozano








(LUMBERTON, North Carolina) -- A Cumberland County woman says her first car-buying experience was tainted because of an offensive fakebook post made by the Lumberton Honda dealership.

Trinity Bethune said she purchased her first car at the dealership on Wednesday.

She was excited to be able to do all of this with her own money.

However, that quickly changed when Bethune looked on fakebook on Thursday and saw a post on the dealership's page that read,


"Congratulations to Bon Quisha on her 2016 Toyota Camry."

Bethune, in shock and disbelief, responded to the post.


"I'm not sure if this is a 'joke' or something but my name is definitely Trinity Bethune," she said.

"I'm very offended by this post, it's almost a racial slur. If I'm not addressed by MY name then please don't address me at all."

Bethune says the post was up for more than an hour before it was deleted.

The screenshots quickly spreading on social media and went viral on TikTok.

"The name 'Bon Quisha' it seems like a stereotype for someone, you know, for them to be like ghetto," Bethune said.

"It's something people use towards Black people as a racial slur and as an offensive term."

The 21-year-old works as a personal care assistant in Cumberland County.

She said it's hurtful to be reduced to a stereotype.

"I feel like my character was played with. I mean, I think I carry myself in a very well manner," she said.

ABC11 spoke to the dealership owner off-camera.

He said that the employee who made the offensive post has been fired.

They also reached out to Bethune to apologize on Thursday.
















Offline Battle

  • Honorary Wakandan
  • *****
  • Posts: 11056
  • M.A.X. Commander
    • View Profile
Re: Facebook’s Prospects May Rest on Trove of Data
« Reply #40 on: September 13, 2021, 08:18:25 pm »
Monday, 13th  September ~ Two Thousand & Twenty One
FEC finds Twitter didn't break law by blocking spread of Hunter Biden story
by MYCHAEL SCHNELL









The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has ruled that Twitter did not break election laws in October when it blocked users from sharing links to a New York Post story about President Biden's son Hunter Biden, according to The New York Times.

The Times, citing a document it obtained outlining the decision, reported Monday that the FEC said Twitter's actions in blocking the spread of the article were undertaken with valid commercial reason — not a political purpose — making them legal.

It said the company “credibly explained” that stopping the spread of the article, which was based on an email retrieved from the hard drive of a laptop that was said to belong to Hunter Biden, was a commercial decision in line with existing policies that pertain to hacked materials.

The commission reportedly made the decision last month in private and will reveal it in public soon.

The final vote of the commission — which is made up of of three Democratic-aligned commissioners and three republicans — remains unknown.

The controversy began when the New York Post published a story in October 2020 — less than a month before the presidential election — alleging that Hunter Biden used his influence to connect a Ukrainian businessman, and fellow board member at the gas company Burisma, with his father when he was serving as vice president.

The Post said it had received documents used for the story from individual-1’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani and that the information was discovered on a laptop that was dropped off at a repair shop in April 2019 and never retrieved.

Twitter and fakebook took steps to limit the spread of the story after questions sparked regarding its sourcing.

The platform prevented users from sharing links to the story in tweets or direct messages based on its hacked materials policy, which sparked outrage among republicans.

Days after, however, Twitter decided to reverse its decision.

CEO Jack Dorsey later said banning the sharing of the story was a “mistake.”

The republican national committee (rnc) filed a formal FEC complaint against Twitter contending that the platform's decision to block the sharing of the story was an “illegal in-kind contribution” to then-candidate Biden’s campaign.

The FEC in its ruling also reportedly dismissed claims that Twitter breached election laws by “shadow banning” republican users, or appearing to decrease the visibility of their posts without giving an explanation.

The commission also dismissed claims that Twitter violated election regulations by suppressing other content that was unfavorable to President Biden and labeling individual-1’s tweets with warnings for misinformation.

The commission said those allegations were “vague, speculative and unsupported by the available information.”