I think if any other (smaller) site were continually posting CSAM without moderation, it would be banned. What’s different about X? The fact that Elon Musk runs it and he’s in with a powerful dictator?
At some point you have to admit the CSAM is not the problem, it’s the person running it, whether they have the power to stop you/fight back or not.
What’s different about X?
Well, you kind of said it yourself: The fact that, since it’s sadly still one of the largest social outlets, there’s a whole economy around it. If Europe banned X tomorrow, a lot of people and companies would take a non-negligible hit to their revenue. We can argue that probably these people are not a majority of the other half of people in Europe that don’t want X gone, but in the end, politicians and lawmakers care about money and (in a very distant second place) what the majority of their constituents say.
I wonder how feasible it would be if they’d announce a deadline whereby it would be blocked and recommend people and business to move onto a federated alternative.
You and I both know people, politicians, journalists would just move to Threads before they move to the fedi or Bluesky or any FOSS alternative.
They want an algorithm.
I would love if that’s the case but I’m frankly not holding my breath.
They wouldn’t suddenly ban it though.
Any ban would roll in without enough time for people to switch away. Twitter doesn’t do anything special that can’t be replicated elsewhere.
not just banned, but there would be criminal charges brought on the owners.
Musk should be prosecuted for distribution of CSAM.
Absolutely. And soliciting Epstein for sex with minors. Let’s not forget about that. He was begging to get on the island and get some underage tail. It was pretty pathetic.
He should be held liable, but he won’t be. Not by people who do the same thing.
I think if any other (smaller) site were continually posting CSAM without moderation, it would be banned.
On what legal grounds would that happen?
Confiscate every server that X uses as evidence. Same thing you do with any CSAM case.
And how does that work legally?
Same as it works to crush the little man.
A judge signs a warrant. Go read a wiki article or something instead of asking stupid questions.
I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve read (on sites like Ars Technica that cover technology) about dark web sites trading CSAM being shut down. By the FBI in America, by Interpol in the EU… I don’t know what legal grounds they use to do it.
You don’t think CSAM should be illegal? Or you genuinely don’t understand why it is, or what law it breaks?
don’t bother with them, they are a zionist and thinks laws shouldn’t apply to the powerful, (according to other comments they made in this post).
depends on the country, but the same framework as an individual spreading CSAM.
Musk should be treated like the pedo he is.
Yes, it is unfortunately becoming increasingly clear that even in the EU, billionaires and their companies are above the law. The legal situation should be clear here and there should be consequences - but there apparently aren’t any.
Unfortunately, this applies not only to Twitter, but to most US tech giants in particular, to meta, for example. I have already stopped counting the massive violations of the GDPR that meta and others are constantly committing, because nothing happens anyway. If anything, the fines are so low that violating the law brings these companies far more revenue than it costs them.
So unfortunately, the same major issue that brought the US to the brink of a straight up dictatorship also applies in Europe: even the most blatant violations of the law have no serious consequences for the richest of the rich – and that is why billionaires are becoming more and more powerful.
The situation may be better in the EU for now than in the US, whose legal system obviously no longer even maintains the appearance of fairness, but even in the EU, the enforcement of the law is miles away from anything that could even remotely be called justice.
The reason seems to me to be the same as in the US: concentration of power in a tiny billionaire class that asserts its influence through corruption.
I think that if things continue like this, and I see no indicators that they will not, it will not be long before even the appearance of justice is abandoned in the EU as well.
Edit: Here is an example of how this is possible - it’s just plain old corruption, but in the highest ranks of our institutions: From Meta to the EU Parliament: Former chief lobbyist negotiates data protection (German article)
Aura Salla was Meta’s chief lobbyist in Brussels for many years. Her task: to convince politicians to weaken EU digital rules such as data protection in order to generate even higher profits with Facebook, WhatsApp, and other platforms.
How about we just fine them to oblivion and make the people responsible answer for their crimes?
How about we start throwing executives into jail starting with the top and working the way down?
How do you enforce the fines? Wouldn’t you have to invade the USA to enforce any meaningful fines?
Elon Musk does a lot of business in Europe. You seize his assets in Europe to enforce the fines.
Pay up or you’re banned
Shouldn’t they want it banned because it already broke the law? How many lines have to be crossed before anyone does anything?
Anarchism for the rich(law does not affect them), rugged police state for the poor,
I’m not clicking the link to read this but these sort of headlines are often a result of their survey intentionally wording things like this to spin the narrative. Anyone who does in fact want it banned immediately would still say yes to the question. I’d suspect there are many such folks across Europe.
And ban Facebook too. It’s been breaking the law a lot longer!
Just imagine how funny it would be if people would just ditch all that shit.
So you suggest that people should see others in real life? Out and about? What are you, a savage?
I’d rather not see a great firewall of Europe.
I’d be happy to see them banned from doing business here though. Hit them where it hurts, their money.
Yes, I wish they would ban Tesla cars in Europe. That would be amazing.
There are an outrageous amount of Tesla vehicles in Lisbon. But there are some beautiful Chinese brands that are now undercutting them. With I think Forthing as a direct competitor.
Weird to be that low for “continues to break the law.”
They’ll immediately ban “from the river to the sea” and prosecute everyone who says/displays it. but a multinational corporation is just allowed to break the law and maybe the politicians will at some point allowed them to face the law.
Uh. You do understand that this law breaking includes not cracking down hard enough on illegal content? Like that Hamas slogan?
I’m expressing how much their laws are bullshit. they are draconically applied on people protesting a genocide. while the question of “should the law be applied to corporations” is left open as a debatable topic.
Laws are made to protect the ingroup and bind the outgroup.
and even though it was an example of their hypocrisy and not the point of the argument I’ll say it regardless
From the river to the sea Palestine will be free
From the sea to the river Palestine will live forever
Uh. So… Prosecuting bad. Not prosecuting those who do not cooperate with the prosecutors also bad because hypocrisy.
i don’t think you get the point
I think you are just not making any sense.
Do you think maybe some laws can be bad and others good and that encouraging enforcement of a good law doesn’t mean encouraging enforcement of the bad ones?
my point is: Why when it comes to the public, laws are enforced to the letter, but for corporations, the question of “should the law apply” is a public debate instead of a “Duh. of course”?
Yeah. I understand what you mean. That is simply not true. Ok, teachable moment.
In Germany, that slogan is considered a Hamas slogan. Hamas has been classified as an extremist organization. That means that using its slogans and symbols is illegal under the same laws that make Nazi slogans and symbols illegal. That’s the hate speech and illegal content that online platforms are supposed to remove.
Failing to crack down on hate speech is one of the biggest complaints against X. If you demand that authorities to enforce EU platform laws harder, then what happens is that this slogan is suppressed harder. You understand?
i want it banned even if it doesnt
100% of this European want X banned without further ado.
Yesterdaythe moment the sink carrying cancer walked in.
I don’t like the idea of “banning” users from accessing a website. But I am certainly in favor of banning sovereign companies from doing business with the company that owns a website, and seizing any physical assets that the website company owns within the laws reach.
Lmao, if only
If we obstinantly refuse to call it anything else, then it as twitter shall forever remain
I want it banned regardless :D
More than half are ok with any company breaking the law?
According to a new YouGov survey, a vast majority of respondents in Germany, France, Spain, Italy and Poland (60-78%) think that the EU should take further action against X if it does not address breaches to European law brought forward by the Commission last year [1]. The majority of those (62%-73%) who wanted further action – and 47% of total participants – want X to be banned from the EU if it refuses to address these breaches [2]
20% being fine with it is still worrying to me.
20% of the population is just crazy and will believe in flat earth, young earth, essential oils, Jewish space lasers, 4d trump chess or bevolent ayatollahs.
Good point, I forgot it was a survey.
I imagine some of them are okay with fines, or strongly worded letters.
I say that, in order to save the species, ban all social media, everywhere.
but lemmy :(
You might not realize it, but the Fediverse is social media so a ban would be rather detrimental to this place.
Damn near the entire internet is “social media” but people usually mean “social networking sites”.
That’s literally not possible.
I’m not talking about from a practical standpoint I’m talking about from a theoretical standpoint.
Given that social media being a form of media where humans socialize with each other is not something that can be banned because humans are intrinsically social creatures and modern technology facilities media based communication.
What we don’t need is social media banned. We need regulation and enforcement and teeth for those regulations.
Almost all of the bad and negative parts of social media are results of companies driving profits and engagement at the cost of everything else, including the well-being of their users (Such as artificially, inflating, negativity and division because that drives more engagement).
Make the platform liable for the hate posted on them. They have algorithms manipulating what we see, those same algorithms send those messages to us for profit.
Hence the justification form holding them liable for content. Civil suits will destroy them in no time.
That’s an abysmally bad idea. This would be a wet dream for companies like Meta.
Effectively that would lock in the monopoly by huge social media platforms and absolutely no one would be able to try and make alternatives.
That idea would raise the bar for entry into social media to such a degree that only establish platforms can maintain themselves.
Which would make things like Lemmy, anything on the fedaverse, any third-party or fledgling social media platform…etc defunct overnight. And the only options would be existing, abusive, monopolistic, corporate managed platforms.
Nearly half? Sheesh.
Maybe it’s because most Europeans don’t have a strong opinion about X. I really don’t think it’s quite as popular here as in the USA. Which is also the reason many don’t know how unhinged the current admin is.
A lot of politicians and governments still use it as an official platform. I wish they would stop doing that and giving it any sort of legitimacy.
That was always a bad idea and feeds my mild Cassandra complex.
No government should be relying on private platforms like that.
To be fair, the only time I used Twitter was in a data science course that required to capture some data from the “firehose” (unsorted and unfiltered realtime stream of tweets). Other than that I never cared for it. Wouldn’t affect me at all if they ban it, so it’s easy to be in favor of such a ban.
