5 ms·

"It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform." What an utter ridiculous and misleading statement from the com

"It is absurd to claim that a platform or its owner are responsible for abuse of that platform." What an utter ridiculous and misleading statement from the company that LITERALLY REFUSES to take down drug and malware shops from its platform. There's tens of academic studies that have looked at this problem and many of them have Telegram as the worst offender. Here's just one of the studies: https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/io/news/addressing-distribution-illicit-sexual-content-minors-online https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/io/news/addressing-distributi...

ronsor 2y ago
Facebook is also full of drug and malware shops and advertisements for such.
- DragonStrength 2y ago
  Yep, and I think we’re way too soft on Meta for what they push and profit from on FB and Instagram.
- threeseed 2y ago
  Meta will take down those ads if reported. What is important when it comes to regulators is not whether you fail to comply or not. It is whether you take your responsibility to comply seriously e.g. timely responses to information requests, continuous process improvement etc.
  - cpncrunch 2y ago
    The Via Rail scam card ads have been on facebook for months. You can figure out it's a scam with a 2 second google search: https://www.facebook.com/viarailcanada/posts/scam-warning-avertissement-de-fraudearnaquevia-rail-has-been-made-aware-of-sever/888803923291472/ https://www.facebook.com/viarailcanada/posts/scam-warning-av... I reported it (like others in this thread), but facebook said it didn't break any rules. I requested another review, and they said the same thing, with no way for me to make any comments or replies. Perhaps they will remove certain ads if it's instantly obvious that it is illegal, but overall they're pretty terrible at moderation.
    - MattGaiser 2y ago
      For the VIA thing, I have legitimately earned VIA Preference Points for surveys [0] and have heard of them being offered as survey rewards at my alma mater of Queen’s University (where VIA use is pretty heavy). [0] https://campaign.askingcanadians.com/faq/via https://campaign.askingcanadians.com/faq/via So I can see some of those offers being legitimate.
    - brookst 2y ago
      Meta being bad at following their policies is a different problem than a platform whose policies say they won’t stop abuse. You can argue which problem is worse, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that the world should treat the two problems the same.
    - threeseed 2y ago
      The priority for regulators are money laundering, sanctions evasion, terrorism, CSAM, trafficking etc. Serious crimes where people's lives are at stake. Scams in general are towards the bottom on everyone's priority list.
      - meiraleal 2y ago
        Why are you changing the focus to regulators and not meta moderation which is what you claimed that is done? (and many proved in this thread that no they don't remove content that breaks local laws).
        threeseed 2y ago
        Because company behaviour is a reflection of the laws in the places it operates.
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 2y ago
    I regularly report scam ads as well as obvious catfishing friend requests from obviously fake accounts whose only post is a sketchy URL to some "sex chat". Almost all of the reports are rejected. It seems obvious to me that Meta's moderation is mostly about pretending just enough for regulators to go away, and no more. Hell, Meta probably indirectly makes money from these scams by targeting more scams at the people who fall for them, at a premium. Meta makes money, scammers make money, regulators are content. It's a win-win-win.
  - meiraleal 2y ago
    No they won't. I report all the time and every one of them they told me they reviewed it and disagree the ads/posts are against the law.
  - peoplefromibiza 2y ago
    like they did with Cambridge Analytica I guess...
- amelius 2y ago
  Does that justify it then?
  - spwa4 2y ago
    It shows what the EU action is about. It's not about telegram's supposed crimes, whatever you think they are, because other platforms are full of the same crimes. The difference is that other platforms give EU states access to people's private messages. If you go into the technicalities of what EXACTLY this means, it started with a list of 27 organizations that got blanket access, without judicial oversight (because all of the different rules from the member states apply. Some do not require judicial oversight). Organized long ago by Interpol. It grew from there, exactly as people expected. Oh and in case you're wondering. This already exists. It is NOT about the new EU directive ("directive 92"). This is about delivering specific individual's messages, when specifically asked to, and maybe blocking them.
    - tpm 2y ago
      Which EU action? France which arrested Durov is not the EU. The EU can't arrest anyone, only the member states can. Durov was not arrested because of the EU DSA.
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - ath3nd 2y ago
      > The difference is that other platforms give EU states access to people's private messages. Which other platforms are you talking about because both Signal and WhatsApp are e2e encrypted?
    - ratg13 2y ago
      Why do you think this is an EU action and not just France? France has much tougher laws on this than the rest of the EU. In fact when publishing to the App Store as a developer you are primarily asked 2 questions. 1) What types of encryption you implement 2) Whether you are planning on making your app available in France
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- mc32 2y ago
  …and Mastodon, and… basically all social media. So it’s likely another reason but the authorities are using legal pretenses to arrest this guy.
heraldgeezer 2y ago
Instagram and Snapchat is full of illegal shit.
asqueella 2y ago
What’s the source for your “LITERALLY REFUSES” claim? The study you linked names instagram as “the most important platform”…
miohtama 2y ago
Telegram does not refuse take down content. I have reported scams, phishing, selling stolen credit cards and such to Telegram and they have all taken down. Maybe not in 24h, but still taken down. Also from your study: “Our investigation finds that large networks of accounts, purportedly operated by minors, are openly advertising SG-CSAM for sale on social media. Instagram has emerged as the primary platform for such networks, providing features that facilitate connections between buyers and sellers. Instagram's popularity and user-friendly interface make it a preferred option for these activities.”
- miohtama 2y ago
  Here is now an article that has some numbers on Telegram moderation and policies https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41354528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41354528
- aa_is_op 2y ago
  Yes, it does. The Dutch government literally held a meeting on the topic of Telegram hosting reams of CP and revenge porn and not acting on any of their complaints for 2 years now.
  - asqueella 2y ago
    I reported a drug bot yesterday, and it's taken down already. It's weird that the Dutch government is ignored like that. I tried Googling (without knowing Dutch I found these: https://archive.is/dGp2w https://archive.is/dGp2w https://www.inhope.org/EN/articles/tackling-csam-hosting-in-the-netherlands https://www.inhope.org/EN/articles/tackling-csam-hosting-in-... ) and I guess the difference is that I'm talking about public bots/channels, and the problem lies with private chats / groups?
    - aa_is_op 2y ago
      >I reported a drug bot yesterday, and it's taken down already. Yes, random internet person. I believe what you say, and not totally making it up just to win an internet argument. I actually work in cybersecurity. I think I know how Telegram's support team reacts, which is not react at all.
H3BCKN 2y ago
What exactly is wrong with drug shops? Providing certain goods to consenting adults is not immoral. Let alone should not be a reason for them to be banned. In half of the U.S. states and European countries, cannabis is either legal or decriminalized in small amounts. In 2024, it's not a big deal, and without these means of communication, potential consumers would have to go back to the streets to purchase something, risking many dangerous situations. I'm not a 'consumer,' but I consider it a huge advantage of such platforms in terms of increasing safety and clarity.

ronsor 2y ago

Facebook is also full of drug and malware shops and advertisements for such.

DragonStrength 2y ago
Yep, and I think we’re way too soft on Meta for what they push and profit from on FB and Instagram.
threeseed 2y ago
Meta will take down those ads if reported. What is important when it comes to regulators is not whether you fail to comply or not. It is whether you take your responsibility to comply seriously e.g. timely responses to information requests, continuous process improvement etc.
- cpncrunch 2y ago
  The Via Rail scam card ads have been on facebook for months. You can figure out it's a scam with a 2 second google search: https://www.facebook.com/viarailcanada/posts/scam-warning-avertissement-de-fraudearnaquevia-rail-has-been-made-aware-of-sever/888803923291472/ https://www.facebook.com/viarailcanada/posts/scam-warning-av... I reported it (like others in this thread), but facebook said it didn't break any rules. I requested another review, and they said the same thing, with no way for me to make any comments or replies. Perhaps they will remove certain ads if it's instantly obvious that it is illegal, but overall they're pretty terrible at moderation.
  - MattGaiser 2y ago
    For the VIA thing, I have legitimately earned VIA Preference Points for surveys [0] and have heard of them being offered as survey rewards at my alma mater of Queen’s University (where VIA use is pretty heavy). [0] https://campaign.askingcanadians.com/faq/via https://campaign.askingcanadians.com/faq/via So I can see some of those offers being legitimate.
  - brookst 2y ago
    Meta being bad at following their policies is a different problem than a platform whose policies say they won’t stop abuse. You can argue which problem is worse, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to say that the world should treat the two problems the same.
  - threeseed 2y ago
    The priority for regulators are money laundering, sanctions evasion, terrorism, CSAM, trafficking etc. Serious crimes where people's lives are at stake. Scams in general are towards the bottom on everyone's priority list.
    - meiraleal 2y ago
      Why are you changing the focus to regulators and not meta moderation which is what you claimed that is done? (and many proved in this thread that no they don't remove content that breaks local laws).
      - threeseed 2y ago
        Because company behaviour is a reflection of the laws in the places it operates.
- mtlmtlmtlmtl 2y ago
  I regularly report scam ads as well as obvious catfishing friend requests from obviously fake accounts whose only post is a sketchy URL to some "sex chat". Almost all of the reports are rejected. It seems obvious to me that Meta's moderation is mostly about pretending just enough for regulators to go away, and no more. Hell, Meta probably indirectly makes money from these scams by targeting more scams at the people who fall for them, at a premium. Meta makes money, scammers make money, regulators are content. It's a win-win-win.
- meiraleal 2y ago
  No they won't. I report all the time and every one of them they told me they reviewed it and disagree the ads/posts are against the law.
- peoplefromibiza 2y ago
  like they did with Cambridge Analytica I guess...
amelius 2y ago
Does that justify it then?
- spwa4 2y ago
  It shows what the EU action is about. It's not about telegram's supposed crimes, whatever you think they are, because other platforms are full of the same crimes. The difference is that other platforms give EU states access to people's private messages. If you go into the technicalities of what EXACTLY this means, it started with a list of 27 organizations that got blanket access, without judicial oversight (because all of the different rules from the member states apply. Some do not require judicial oversight). Organized long ago by Interpol. It grew from there, exactly as people expected. Oh and in case you're wondering. This already exists. It is NOT about the new EU directive ("directive 92"). This is about delivering specific individual's messages, when specifically asked to, and maybe blocking them.
  - tpm 2y ago
    Which EU action? France which arrested Durov is not the EU. The EU can't arrest anyone, only the member states can. Durov was not arrested because of the EU DSA.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - ath3nd 2y ago
    > The difference is that other platforms give EU states access to people's private messages. Which other platforms are you talking about because both Signal and WhatsApp are e2e encrypted?
  - ratg13 2y ago
    Why do you think this is an EU action and not just France? France has much tougher laws on this than the rest of the EU. In fact when publishing to the App Store as a developer you are primarily asked 2 questions. 1) What types of encryption you implement 2) Whether you are planning on making your app available in France
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
mc32 2y ago
…and Mastodon, and… basically all social media. So it’s likely another reason but the authorities are using legal pretenses to arrest this guy.

heraldgeezer 2y ago

Instagram and Snapchat is full of illegal shit.

asqueella 2y ago

What’s the source for your “LITERALLY REFUSES” claim? The study you linked names instagram as “the most important platform”…

miohtama 2y ago

Telegram does not refuse take down content. I have reported scams, phishing, selling stolen credit cards and such to Telegram and they have all taken down. Maybe not in 24h, but still taken down. Also from your study: “Our investigation finds that large networks of accounts, purportedly operated by minors, are openly advertising SG-CSAM for sale on social media. Instagram has emerged as the primary platform for such networks, providing features that facilitate connections between buyers and sellers. Instagram's popularity and user-friendly interface make it a preferred option for these activities.”

miohtama 2y ago
Here is now an article that has some numbers on Telegram moderation and policies https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41354528 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41354528
aa_is_op 2y ago
Yes, it does. The Dutch government literally held a meeting on the topic of Telegram hosting reams of CP and revenge porn and not acting on any of their complaints for 2 years now.
- asqueella 2y ago
  I reported a drug bot yesterday, and it's taken down already. It's weird that the Dutch government is ignored like that. I tried Googling (without knowing Dutch I found these: https://archive.is/dGp2w https://archive.is/dGp2w https://www.inhope.org/EN/articles/tackling-csam-hosting-in-the-netherlands https://www.inhope.org/EN/articles/tackling-csam-hosting-in-... ) and I guess the difference is that I'm talking about public bots/channels, and the problem lies with private chats / groups?
  - aa_is_op 2y ago
    >I reported a drug bot yesterday, and it's taken down already. Yes, random internet person. I believe what you say, and not totally making it up just to win an internet argument. I actually work in cybersecurity. I think I know how Telegram's support team reacts, which is not react at all.

H3BCKN 2y ago

What exactly is wrong with drug shops? Providing certain goods to consenting adults is not immoral. Let alone should not be a reason for them to be banned. In half of the U.S. states and European countries, cannabis is either legal or decriminalized in small amounts. In 2024, it's not a big deal, and without these means of communication, potential consumers would have to go back to the streets to purchase something, risking many dangerous situations. I'm not a 'consumer,' but I consider it a huge advantage of such platforms in terms of increasing safety and clarity.