Jump to content

Cre8asiteforums Internet Marketing
and Conversion Web Design


Photo

Facebook, Google And Twitter: Designated Censors In Eu?

fake news censor social media

  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3,439 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 12:00 PM

The title is link bait. I know. :)

The real title is:
Germany approves plans to fine social media firms up to €50m
https://www.theguard...firms-up-to-50m

But this is how I interpret it since they will become the de facto censors since it is known a large percentage of people get their news (fake or not) from these 3.
 

Measure requires social media platforms to remove obviously illegal hate speech and other postings within 24 hrs after receiving a notification or complaint, and to block other offensive content within 7 days.

 

... but critics warn it could have drastic consequences for free speech online.

 

the law also provides for fines of up to €5m for the person each company designates to deal with the complaints procedure if it doesn’t meet requirements

Talk about job stress. Any applicants?

 

 

and we Canucks also got into the fray.

Google Must Delete Search Results Worldwide, Supreme Court of Canada Rules
https://fortune.com/...e-court-google/
 

Those siding with Google, including civil liberties groups, had warned that allowing the injunction would harm free speech, setting a precedent to let any judge anywhere order a global ban on what appears on search engines.

 

We have not, to date, accepted that freedom of expression requires the facilitation of the unlawful sale of goods," wrote Judge Rosalie Abella.

Edited by bobbb, 09 July 2017 - 12:22 PM.


#2 earlpearl

earlpearl

    Hall of Fame

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 2,531 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 01:46 PM

With its many benefits there are many drawbacks and problems to the interwebs and social media.  Reiterative BS AKA Fake News is one of those problems.  On an anecdotal basis (possibly I posted this before) I had the following interaction with an old friend:

 

1.  We follow one another on twitter.

2.  Following the US pres election I went back on twitter a lot.

3.  He posts A LOT on twitter and it appears to be all political.  He and I are on complete diametrically opposite political sides.  Post election I've posted a lot of political "hot air" on twitter.

4.  After a while I contacted him to ask if he was still following me.  He was and is.

5.  He never once attacked me on twitter nor had I attacked him.

6.  I asked him why he hadn't attacked me (when he attacks a lot of others in responses). 

7.  He responded that he doesn't attack people he knows.

 

Then the big ones:

 

We both acknowledged, virtually simultaneously, that we'd never say in public what we'd tweet on the "anonymous" interwebs.  He said it would result in him being shot.  I put it that I would get a LOT of punches in the nose.  Regardless, we are too old and experienced and realize this interwebs craziness is a function of its anonymity and the distance between you and real people.

 

So I applaud this effort in Germany.  I'm sure it won't be perfect, if its passed and enforced.  It may create other issues and problems. 

 

Big DEAL.  Start dealing with the issues of problems...at least one way....and see how it turns out.  Once you uncover the issues it creates then try and deal with those new problems.

 

Man...if the US had confronted this a while ago...maybe the blustering orange man, infantile, no knowledge,  whacko, lying, serial cheater, woman abuser wouldn't be president. 

 

The world would be a better place.

 

:D   rant over



#3 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3,439 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 03:29 PM

I'm wondering how easy it will be to defeat this. Surely they will not hire humans. This will be an algorithm and people will be gaming this like they game the SERPS;  like flooding the mechanism with "reports" against whatever kind a person is flogging (real vs fake). Flood enough "real" stuff as "fake" using words like sexist, racist, and all kinds of other ISTs and ISMs and you may be able to suppress the other side. We have seen that work in the past. Whoever will be the most aggressive will make most points.
 

Man...if the US had confronted this a while ago...maybe the blustering orange man, infantile, no knowledge,  whacko, lying, serial cheater, woman abuser wouldn't be president.

Not sure. From what I can make out here, in the "The True North strong and free" AKA Canada, people who support the orange man truly believe what they are saying and doing and are thus patriots (you can add "in their minds" if you like).

Like the EU fine of $2.7B, I see this being eventually watered down.

Will be interesting to follow.



#4 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3,439 posts

Posted 20 July 2017 - 09:41 AM

From link above:

Google Must Delete Search Results Worldwide, Supreme Court of Canada Rules

 

Seems France wants in on this too.

Google 'right to be forgotten' case goes to top EU court
http://www.zdnet.com...o-top-eu-court/

France's highest administrative court has asked the Court of Justice of the European Union to consider whether Google must delist certain search results globally.


#5 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3,439 posts

Posted 05 August 2017 - 09:46 AM

YouTube Is Using Machine Learning to Combat Terror Content
http://fortune.com/2...terror-content/
 

"Our machine learning systems are faster and more effective than ever before," YouTube wrote in a blog post on Tuesday. "Over 75 percent of the videos we've removed for violent extremism over the past month were taken down before receiving a single human flag."

 

 

I presume the other ism will follow soon.

 

Wonder if they check any of that 75% using a human just to make sure the AI is well tuned.



#6 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3,439 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 11:08 AM

U.S. judge puts halt to Canadian court order for Google to delist search results
https://ca.finance.y...-214856153.html
 

It says Canada's top court overstepped its bounds and the right to free speech online.

About one month after the Supreme Court decision, Google turned to the courts in California to squash the order, arguing it couldn't be enforced in the United States because it violated sweeping free speech rights under the First Amendment.

I could have predicted this. There is no way the Supreme Court of Canada has global jurisdiction.

Thanks Abella J., McLachlin C.J.,  Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner, Gascon, and Brown JJ. for making us look stoopid and arrogant in front of the world. Maybe those 7 Supreme Court judges should have taken a slice of humble pie before coming to a decision.

The two dissenting judges Côté and Rowe JJ. got it right.

if anyone has time to waste: (the Supreme Court judgment)
https://www.canlii.o.../2017scc34.html

 

I presume France will now back off also. They will be overturned too.

 

Just a note: google.ca has complied.


Edited by bobbb, 05 November 2017 - 06:34 PM.


#7 iamlost

iamlost

    The Wind Master

  • Site Administrators
  • 5,517 posts

Posted 05 November 2017 - 02:07 PM

The intertubes have two overlapping problems:

* people, in the broad sense, think of SM in particular and the intertubes generally as private when, with a few exceptions and a few more optional settings that may or may not be turned off without notice, they are public fora. Yes, people, broadly speaking, are idjits.

* courts of law frequently make findings that exceed their jurisdiction but that can have consequences for those outside. An example from a decade or so ago was an American one against a gambling site whose owners were Canadian and whose servers were in a third country; yet the court said that it had jurisdiction because American citizens gambled on the site against US law (designed to protect US casinos). One of the owners was on a flight that landed in the US on the way to his final destination: he was removed, arrested, and jailed.

Apparent 'exceeding' authority may simply be a method, not of going enforcing the finding outside of the country, of being able to charge participants who stop by some point in the future. International coordination in these matters isn't even on the drawing board so along with good travel and medical insurance a webdev may well be advised to check with a competent qualified lawyer before crossing borders, even overflying if someone decides to make a point.


Edited by iamlost, 05 November 2017 - 02:08 PM.


#8 bobbb

bobbb

    Sonic Boom Member

  • Hall Of Fame
  • 3,439 posts

Posted 06 November 2017 - 11:22 AM

Yes I remember that case or something similar so it is good advice and something to keep in mind when crossing borders. I don't think the example applies in this case.

 

That was a criminal case and a warrant was probably issued so it was executed (maybe it was done with very great haste as it seemed opportune).

 

The Google thing is just a civil litigation between two entities and no criminal code involved. It's not like google.com or google.fr or google.co.uk will land at Pearson airport any time soon. Google.ca has complied and they aren't likely to arrest Larry if he drives to Vancouver. It's up to the other party to make sure the ruling is applied... and now they are dead in the water. Google won.





RSS Feed


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users