Twitter Suspends 300,000 Accounts Tied To Terrorism In 2017 (bloomberg.com) 69
According to a new transparency report, Twitter said it suspended nearly 300,000 accounts globally linked to terrorism in the first half of the year. The company is improving automation tools used to help block accounts that promote terrorism and violence. Bloomberg reports: Of [the nearly 300,000 accounts that were suspended], roughly 95 percent were identified by the company's spam-fighting automation tools. Meanwhile, the social network said government data requests continued to increase, and that it provided authorities with data on roughly 3,900 accounts from January to June. Twitter said about 75 percent of the blocked accounts this year were spotted before a single tweet was sent, and that 935,897 accounts had been suspended since August 2015, with two-thirds of those coming in the past year. American authorities made 2,111 requests from Twitter from January to June, the most of the 83 countries tracked by the company. Twitter supplied information on users in 77 percent of the inquiries. Japan made 1,384 requests and the U.K. issued 606 requests. Turkish authorities continued a trend of aggressively policing Twitter, making 554 requests for account data and issuing court orders to remove 715 pieces of content. Other governments made only 38 total content-removal requests.
300,000 terrorists? (Score:3, Insightful)
Or is it rather 300,000 accounts from people who were not politically correct?
Re:300,000 terrorists? (Score:4, Interesting)
Ha! Good point. You know that saying:
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.
-- /.
t's been 1 minute since you last successfully posted a comment
Fuck You
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Your example. Not mine.
http://www.latimes.com/world/m... [latimes.com]
Re: (Score:1)
It seems you want to join in the action of being the target of a law suit. Lets see, twitter is accusing people of being terrorists and supporters of terrorism, that is slander of the worst sort, seriously that kind of accusation can get you killed in a steroid fuelled law enforcer raid. Twitter, you better have proof, you better have evidence before flinging around those kind of accusations. Now add in those bullshit claims by twitter, 'er' yeah morons, supporting terrorism is a fucking crime punishable by
Re: (Score:2)
I personally think it's kind of pointless to ban anyone as free speec
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter is a private service and can remove users for violating their terms of services
That wasn't his point - if they claim specific reasons, they DO have to be careful, as libel could be a concern depending on the accusation, and proof/lack thereof.
Re: (Score:2)
Ha! Good point. You know that saying:
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.
--
Just because it's a saying doesn't mean it's true.
Harming people not actively involved in an injustice is terrorism.
Harming people or assets when the military objective is to inflict terror on the victims is terrorism. It's the definition of it.
Re: (Score:3)
No, the definition is using terror to further political aims, or more accurately: the use or threat thereof of violence to politically coerce a people. Terrorism isn't an act, it's a motive.
Re: (Score:1)
> Harming people not actively involved in an injustice is terrorism.
Like the US dropping the atomic bomb killing ~129,000 of civilians in Japan. Got it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
That sounds like something a terriorist would say.
Re: (Score:1)
Man I hate terrierists, always walkin' around with their little yappy bastard rats.
Re: (Score:1)
Found another terrorist. Get him!
Trump? (Score:2, Funny)
Did they suspend Trump?
Funny: Captcha was "unifies"
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Or is it rather 300,000 accounts from people who were not politically correct?
Nope, terrorism. [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Oh, you mean terrorism [wikipedia.org]. And I guess you also mean terrorism [wikipedia.org].
See? I can play that game too. So be very careful who you accuse of terrorism, because there's a big chance you are someone who supports a group which some people would happily consider as "terrorist", meaning you are probably a terrorist yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you mean terrorism [wikipedia.org]. And I guess you also mean terrorism [wikipedia.org].
Yes! You're getting it now! Terrorism is extreme violence that is intended to make political change by instilling fear.
See? I can play that game too. So be very careful who you accuse of terrorism, because there's a big chance you are someone who supports a group which some people would happily consider as "terrorist", meaning you are probably a terrorist yourself.
I do not support any person or group that promotes or uses violence to instill fear. Violence is a crude and ineffective tool for people who lack (metaphoric) vision.
Re: (Score:1)
I do not support any person or group that promotes or uses violence to instill fear. Violence is a crude and ineffective tool for people who lack (metaphoric) vision.
Looks like you don't belong to any nation that has an army. Violence is what keeps everything in order otherwise Politics wouldn't result in armed men being deployed.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like you don't belong to any nation that has an army.
You've moved the goalposts here. He said he didn't "support any person or group that uses violence...".
Belonging to a nation and supporting the actions of a nation are two entirely different things.
Re: (Score:2)
Given that in the UK, they'll go after idiot trolls that make racist comments targeting celebrities. Yes, that's pretty much it. Not that I'm defending those trolls, but calling them terrorists is a bit much.
Re: (Score:2)
Twitter said about 75 percent of the blocked accounts this year were spotted before a single tweet was sent
It really makes ya wonder how they knew these accounts were tied to "terrorism" and what criteria are they even being used to deplatform people.
Re: (Score:2)
I look at it differently. Once the mechanism is fully in place 90% of the work is done and you can start with very conservative criteria to minimize opposition.
After that, you can update the criteria unannounced every day to the needs of the moment and you can counter criticism by saying the system is not perfect and will be corrected to take in account the reactions.
Re: (Score:2)
Because of who they liked/followed, the content of their profile, direct messages to known assholes, etc. Twitter is more than just tweeting. Not much more, but more.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: 300,000 terrorists? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The rule which talks about terrorism is
But either it's one rule for the élite and another for hoi polloi or threatening to nuke North Korea isn't a threat of violence.
Re:15,000 terrorists? (Score:2)
But yeah, how many were terrorists, how many were "not preferred opinions", and how many were just pissed at their governments for clamping down on free speech?
Re: (Score:2)
If only there were some kind of Internet mechanism that would somehow link to other information resources that could answer questions like this. I have great acronym for it too: Really Terrific For Answers.
Re: (Score:1)
If by US empire you mean people like the Clintons, Soros, the Rockafellars, de Rothschilds, etc, then yes.
If you mean every day decent people who for decades had no knowledge and no power to stop the aforementioned, then no.
Re: (Score:1)
You really should stop reading whatever terrorist source taught you to spell Rockefeller.
Aside from that: "Twitter said about 75 percent of the blocked accounts this year were spotted before a single tweet was sent."
So basically, thought crimes.
Re: (Score:3)
No, basically IP based bans and automated spam filtering.
I don't use twitter, but they run the platform so they set the rules. If they state you cannot post X, Y or Z and you do and get autobanned for it and the tweet doesn't go through and you're prevented from creating more accounts to try to spam the same message again, that's not a thought crime, tha
Re: (Score:2)
That's a valid argument, especially when you say 'must'. But when the market is dominated by a few players who get together with the government to enforce a blackout then that argument becomes highly dubious.
Re: (Score:2)
"Twitter said about 75 percent of the blocked accounts this year were spotted before a single tweet was sent."
So basically, thought crimes.
Wait, Twitter can read my thoughts now?!? How else could they cut people off before they tweeted?
Or maybe they just noticed some asshat using the same IP address to create accounts in bulk and then starting to post terrorist propaganda, and banned the whole lot of them. Or maybe they deleted one account that posted something, and all the brand new accounts with zero tweets that were following them and only them in an attempt to astroturf.
Whenever Twitter uses even a tiny amount of intelligence to deal with
Re: (Score:2)
So, basically, TOS.
Re: (Score:3)
Many people have a legitimate beef with the US empire, and any terrorism is well deserved to be honest.
Having a "legitimate beef" with someone doesn't entitle you to commit a terrorist act against them. I have a legitimate beef with people who double park, or cut me off on the highway, but that doesn't entitle me to detonate bombs in their homes, killing their innocent children.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a "legitimate beef" with someone doesn't entitle you to commit a terrorist act against them. I have a legitimate beef with people who double park, or cut me off on the highway, but that doesn't entitle me to detonate bombs in their homes, killing their innocent children.
So what about people whose homes we're bombing? Are they entitled to return the favor, or is it right when we bomb them but wrong when they bomb us? Because nobody is bombing us because we cut them off on the highway, which makes your example complete and total bullshit.
transparent terrorism tied to Twitter (Score:2)
Yay (Score:2)
Way to go, Twitter! If that doesn't stop them nothing will!
But not the biggest.. (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
He has been allowed to break the TOS by threatening violence against others. He is a source of advertising and revenue for twitter , so they let him stay.
0 from ANTIFA? (Score:1, Troll)
WTF?
Re: (Score:2)
"Free speech," doesn't mean what you think it does.
Relative to the US, it's the idea that you can say stuff and not be arrested by the government .
Re: (Score:2)
The 1st Amendment means that you can say what you want and not get arrested by the government.
"Free Speech" is concept that is older than the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Some people believe that it is an intrinsic human right that goes beyond what the constitution or any one nation state's laws.
Re: (Score:2)
What some people think is irrelevant in venues where intrinsic human rights is not a concept.
Check local listings.
I wonder how many white supremicists (Score:2)
here is a terrorist (Score:1)
bullshit (Score:1)