4 ms·

In Backpage's defense, they were instructed to block those words by their legal team and law enforcement, as those words are not allowed to be posted because th

by jijji 9y ago

In Backpage's defense, they were instructed to block those words by their legal team and law enforcement, as those words are not allowed to be posted because they indicate sexual favors in exchange for money, i.e. prostitution.

xienze 9y ago
They could have, you know, rejected the ads outright and/or passed the info on to law enforcement automatically. Simply filtering the words implies they knew what was going on but did just enough to (hopefully) have plausible deniability.
- dmix 9y ago
  Yes exactly, I'd normally be a staunch defender of Backpage here, assuming they merely acted as a middle man ala Craigslist or any other listings site. Similar to ISPs with the Safe Harbour Act or Tor. But Backpage actively helped these guys create ads that won't trigger any red flags. Instead of blocking the posts, warning them, or straight up banning them, the listing wizard directly suggested ways to conceal illegal activity after detecting 'bad' keywords, in order to help allow the user to continue to use the site. This feature most likely had good intentions for other law abiding users, likely for the largely majority of cases, but it was pretty damn obvious how it also helps some seriously bad guys. You'd just have to look at some of the example keywords which would trigger this automated assistance... Backpage played an active role not just a reactionary passive one. Which is why I understand and support legal action against them - although I'm not sure seizing is the right approach, but that's another story.
  - dbg31415 9y ago
    So... let's walk through this... 1) Paying customer creates an ad (I haven't used Backpage, but I assume they paid to create ads). 2) Paying customer enters some words that the Government has told Backpage not to allow. 3) Backpage's automatic web form error message says... "Hey, you've added some words the Government won't let you use... sorry... it's not us, it's Uncle Sam." 4) Customer changes words to get around filters... I assume things like "sex" turns into "s3x" -- or whatever the bare minimum number of changes were to get around the censorship. 5) Customer posts ads, skirts Government censorship; feels smug and satisfied for beating the system. 6) Government isn't happy that the intent of the filtered words wasn't enforced... expected Backpage to have more (costly) manual review of ads, instead of just exact keyword blocks on ad creation. 7) Backpage was like, "Manual review would destroy our business model..." so they fought it... 8) Government took over and shut them down. Again, I haven't read anything on this... but that's my assumption based on how the Government and tech work. Am I wrong?
    - ino 9y ago
      It's way worse than that. Instead of just assuming, if you don't want to read it all, read just pages 2 and 3 (summary). https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report...
    - dmix 9y ago
      You don't need government to know when things are wrong. This is a flawed worldview from which people criticize market-based approaches - as if there isn't already enough of an incentive to do good, without having to be forced to, or have your hand held at each step. Posting ads for escorts which clearly indicate an underage girl or similar is obviously not something you want on your site. In fact I don't see anywhere this has to be a list of keywords defined by the government at all? And as the other user pointed out, it's far worse than a simple form error.
imron 9y ago
So in their defense, they were just following orders?

by jijji 9y ago

xienze 9y ago

They could have, you know, rejected the ads outright and/or passed the info on to law enforcement automatically. Simply filtering the words implies they knew what was going on but did just enough to (hopefully) have plausible deniability.

dmix 9y ago
Yes exactly, I'd normally be a staunch defender of Backpage here, assuming they merely acted as a middle man ala Craigslist or any other listings site. Similar to ISPs with the Safe Harbour Act or Tor. But Backpage actively helped these guys create ads that won't trigger any red flags. Instead of blocking the posts, warning them, or straight up banning them, the listing wizard directly suggested ways to conceal illegal activity after detecting 'bad' keywords, in order to help allow the user to continue to use the site. This feature most likely had good intentions for other law abiding users, likely for the largely majority of cases, but it was pretty damn obvious how it also helps some seriously bad guys. You'd just have to look at some of the example keywords which would trigger this automated assistance... Backpage played an active role not just a reactionary passive one. Which is why I understand and support legal action against them - although I'm not sure seizing is the right approach, but that's another story.
- dbg31415 9y ago
  So... let's walk through this... 1) Paying customer creates an ad (I haven't used Backpage, but I assume they paid to create ads). 2) Paying customer enters some words that the Government has told Backpage not to allow. 3) Backpage's automatic web form error message says... "Hey, you've added some words the Government won't let you use... sorry... it's not us, it's Uncle Sam." 4) Customer changes words to get around filters... I assume things like "sex" turns into "s3x" -- or whatever the bare minimum number of changes were to get around the censorship. 5) Customer posts ads, skirts Government censorship; feels smug and satisfied for beating the system. 6) Government isn't happy that the intent of the filtered words wasn't enforced... expected Backpage to have more (costly) manual review of ads, instead of just exact keyword blocks on ad creation. 7) Backpage was like, "Manual review would destroy our business model..." so they fought it... 8) Government took over and shut them down. Again, I haven't read anything on this... but that's my assumption based on how the Government and tech work. Am I wrong?
  - ino 9y ago
    It's way worse than that. Instead of just assuming, if you don't want to read it all, read just pages 2 and 3 (summary). https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report...
  - dmix 9y ago
    You don't need government to know when things are wrong. This is a flawed worldview from which people criticize market-based approaches - as if there isn't already enough of an incentive to do good, without having to be forced to, or have your hand held at each step. Posting ads for escorts which clearly indicate an underage girl or similar is obviously not something you want on your site. In fact I don't see anywhere this has to be a list of keywords defined by the government at all? And as the other user pointed out, it's far worse than a simple form error.

imron 9y ago

So in their defense, they were just following orders?