Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
Display:
New Statesman
Short of a new policy by Twitter, then, people have been taking Nazi-hunting into their own hands. By blocking, muting, and training your eyes to glaze over like a Krispy Kreme as soon as soon as you see a frog avi, you can do a reasonable job of avoiding neo-Nazis on the site. But there is any easier way - recently publicised by journalist and author Virginia Heffernan.

"PSA. For anyone beset by Nazi and brownshirt bots: I changed my Twitter address to Germany at the suggestion of a shrewd friend, and they vanished. Germany has stricter hate-speech laws," she tweeted last night. The writer's location is now set to "Bad Wildbad, Deutschland" on the network. But why does this work - and what does it tell us about Twitter's attitude to hate speech?

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Wed Dec 6th, 2017 at 07:33:10 AM EST
Twitter is a sewer.  It is well known Twitter is a sewer.  Example, between dick pictures and rape threats Twitter has hemorrhaged women.  Twitter has lost ~$2 billion (US) over the past ten years and claims* it will "only" lose $21 million (US) in the 4th quarter of 2017.  

If Twitter doesn't clean-up its act Twitter is going out of business.

*  they've claimed that kind of thing before only to get "Twitter Losses Exceed Expectations" headlines in the tech business press.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Wed Dec 6th, 2017 at 05:04:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I've never understood twitter, right from the start it was obviously going to be a paradise for abuse-centric teenagers.

but then again, internet anonimity is a burden for all platforms eventually

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Wed Dec 6th, 2017 at 05:16:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well ATinNM isn't going to say anything against "internet anonimity"!  :-)

Twitter shopped itself around last year.  Reportedly both Google and Snapchat looked and refused.  My guess is Twitter has a number of "elephants in the tree" -- as we say -- and neither wanted to be around when they started dropping.
 

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Dec 7th, 2017 at 01:43:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Sewers serve a purpose. I'm not so sure about Twitter.

What's the big deal of losing $2bn over 10 years? Uber loses close to that per quarter.

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Wed Dec 6th, 2017 at 05:32:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah yes.  The openly criminal enterprise commonly known as "Uber."  

They will continue to hang around and lose money as long as the uber-rich continue to throw money at them.  Since the global elite have anywhere between $45 and $75 trillion (US) - guesses vary - in cash and cash equivalents Uber will be around for a while.

She believed in nothing; only her skepticism kept her from being an atheist. -- Jean-Paul Sartre

by ATinNM on Thu Dec 7th, 2017 at 01:40:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Judge Tosses Twitter Terror Lawsuit
Orrick also concluded the Communications Decency Act of 1996 forbids holding publishers such as Twitter liable for content posted by its users.
[...]
Lacking evidence of any direct link between Twitter activity and the attack, Orrick said that to allow the lawsuit would mean "any plaintiff could hold Twitter liable for any ISIS-related injury without alleging any connection between a particular terrorist act and Twitter's provision of accounts."

Twitter Fights Terrorism Liability Appeal in Ninth Circuit
"The non-financial material support given to terrorist groups is really just as fungible as money," [plaintiff's attorney Joshua] Arisohn told the panel.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Dec 7th, 2017 at 08:39:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series