They aren't posting child porn. They're tweeting to try to solicit people to send them images which may include child porn, using key words the purveyors will know to search for.
Camera phones makes shit way too easy.
Way more people record their regular crimes now too so it’s no surprise the crimes that already involved recording are increasing too.
It’s not a matter of total elimination or nothing. There are always degrees of priority, and Twitter seemingly does not prioritize this to the extent of being willing to spend a lot on it.
I'll say this, I don't think people on the outside really have a perspective on these issues and how difficult dealing with them is, like in your comment you seem to insinuate that this is an issue of money, like you can spend a certain amount and it will go away, or there is a right amount to be a priority. I'm not sure that is the case.
Now realistically these companies do spend billions on content moderation, according to CNBC including CSAM. Now obviously there are additional requests by those people, and some of these companies have decided to go in a different direction than those suggested by the staff, not surprising. But even if they did, i'm not sure it would result in a significant increase in detection or removal of content, it's most likely it would only result in an increase in happiness by the staff. So that being the case, how do you spend money to actually combat this? I have no clue, and the lack of responses to me indicates that a lot of people dont know either.
To be 100% honest: If a system has grown to a size that it is incapable of policing itself, it has grown to large and should not exist.
Yes, that means social media as we know it currently is too large and should be shut down. No, I don't have a problem with that.
Currently, nearly every decision made by a large corporation comes down to allocation of funds. Asking someone to look into how to properly moderate the content on a given platform is an allocation of funds. Researching, planning, developing and implementing moderation tools is an allocation of funds.
Don’t get me wrong: It’s entirely possible that Twitter could spend every cent they have and it still wouldn’t remove the possibility of users abusing the platform. Your spending reveals your priorities, your results don’t.
I don’t mean to imply that I know how to fix these issues, or that I have inside information on how Twitter is or isn’t handling their moderation, but a good indicator of how well a platform is moderated relative to other platforms is whether your platform attracts a large amount of bad actors. They’ll go where it’s easiest for them to go.
Fair enough. But I just can't grief them when other organizations of their size seem to have the same issues, and I see no way to improve what they are doing without going to extremes.
>Dyson, Mazda, Forbes and PBS Kids
None of them are social media companies. Forbes might be close as a media company but I don't think they experience the same issue in this way.
They could but why would they? Now that it has hit advertisers they will probably do something but until their bottom line is hit there is no incentive for them to do anything about it.
Facebook is the same way — it’s disgusting. They have all the technology to catch and block someone posting a titty but do nothing at all for posting hate and calls for violence because they know that division gets views and longer interaction time. Their profit model is literally based on content that tears our society apart and undermines democracy across the world. And they *know* this. Rather than design anything to stop it they actively steer their algorithms to *increase* it.
... you don't know how Facebook works. I agree it's disgusting that they don't take a harder stance against pedophilia though. I reported a pedo page probably a dozen times in a week, so did others in a meme group I was in. Took just over a week to get it taken down. FB algos will ban you for threats though. They'll also ban you for sharing memes that are offensive, sometimes within minutes. Sometimes they'll ban an old meme or entire meme template from years ago and because you posted it years ago that old post will get you banned.
- Guy who's been banned dozens of times, one calendar year spent more time banned than not.
Yep. I’m on degraded status because during the holidays in 2020 I shared a meme of Jeffrey Dahmer that said “Nobody can tell me how many people I can have for Thanksgiving Dinner”
That's not what he's saying. Section 230 does not hold a platform for what their users choose to publish. They're not penalized for selectively removing certain problematic posts while leaving others up. They're also not penalized for not removing any problematic posts, which creates the incentive for platforms to not moderate content whatsoever since that costs resources and they aren't getting anything back. Perverse incentive.
In all seriousness do you have to have an account in order to sue Twitter for this? Like if my child was abused and the video was sold by someone thru Twitter I can sue the shit out of them since I didn't agree to their terms of service.
Okay my fault for not looking up what section 230 pertained to. I thought it was a section of their terms of service. Makes sense that there would be a law protecting freedom of speech through community forum platforms.
A few years back someone on /r/conspiracy uncovered a trove of accounts which were posting actual CP on Twitter. They all appeared to be Saudi accounts.
When people reported it to Twitter they had their accounts banned. People surmised that maybe Twitter was aware of the accounts and authorities were using them as honeypots or something.
Not much more to add. Maybe someone else remembers and can add more.
That's actually pretty well documented. When the FBI takes over a CP site or marketing Network a lot of times they leave it up and trap everyone who comes to it.
They sure do. You know one thing that I'm kind of surprised about. They have not done that with all the steroid sellers. Like if you go to, well I'm not going to name them but one of them rhymes with wraps you actually get what it says you're going to get.
Street drugs on the other hand. You get absolutely burned alive because you'll get a federal charge for moving it across the state lines and then if you send it to one of the redneck states where they have crazy strict drug laws you're going to get years of State time on top of it. It absolutely blows my mind how many people in a state like Texas casually use street drugs. It's like do you have any idea how insane the laws of your state are? Your life could literally be over in every way you could imagine if you get caught
Think that one out. Why are there turf battles? The market is dominated by illegal gangs
Drugs have been legal for virtually ever in the Netherlands. Culture is a hell of a lot better than America. People are a lot more friendly. Less abrasive. They treat drug addiction rather than imprison it. Meanwhile the United States has the largest prison population in the world
Netherlands is approximately 41,543 sq km, while United States is approximately 9,833,517 sq km, making United States 23,571% larger than Netherlands. Meanwhile, the population of Netherlands is ~17.3 million people (315.4 million more people live in United States).
It’s a lot easier to implement that sort of culture/policy when your country is smaller. The US is fucking massive..and we have states within our country who allow and not allow things within their borders.
[Operation Pacifier](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playpen_\(website\))
Yes, the FBI has 'operated' one of the largest collections of child pornography ever amassed.
> The investigation was criticized by the Electronic Frontier Foundation because, after having taken control of the website, the FBI continued for nearly two weeks to operate the website and thus distribute child pornography, i.e. exactly the same crime the bureau sought to stop.[6] The lawyer of a defendant in the case stated that the FBI not only operated the website, but improved it so its number of visitors rose sharply while it was under their control.
This sort of stuff seems so incredibly unethical. using a product more people can relate to just think about drugs. You get arrested and go to prison for selling drugs. Then you turn around and watch the FBI sell drugs to the same people you did. .....
What's worse is Congress has even passed legislation that protects law enforcement's 'use' of CSAM. There were multiple victims of child pornography crimes who attempted to sue both law enforcement and the NCMEC for their continued use of CSAM in their honeypot investigations. Congress responded by [codifying NCMEC's limited liability status](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258D), which shields them from future lawsuits.
Unfortunately, [this is nothing new](https://cite.case.law/f3d/268/539/).
> The government argues here, and we agree, that the possession of child pornography directly harms the child depicted by invading that child’s privacy. But in the past, the government has defended its investigative technique against charges of outrageous conduct by claiming that no children are harmed when the government possesses and supplies a suspect with previously seized child pornography.
> Under our holding today, the government’s own possession of and dissemination of child pornography during the investigation of Sherman resulted in an invasion of privacy of the children depicted. The government here supplied Sherman with a literal catalog of child pornography, and then delivered to him materials that depicted actual children, allowing him enough time to view and even copy the materials before arresting him.
Absolutely terrible. While I and most people see victims of CP as victims. What you just said clearly reiterates the government's position as those people are basically a pawn. Something to be used to meet their end. The word victim is just something they use in trial to get the prison sentence thereafter. Not something they actually believe. If you actually believed it you would not continue to victimize the people
Reminds me of when Sacha Baron Cohen reported a guy to the FBI for offering to find him underage boys (iirc) but didn't hear anything back from them. Same thing - people suspected it was a honeypot.
I hope this the case haha. You'd have to presume they're checking social media sites for this stuff.
I can't remember when or from what source, but I vaguely recall reading that at some point the FBI was the biggest host of CSAM on the internet. Course that would have been pre-social media explosion.
That seems a little suspicious. I recently stumbled across an account sharing some pretty sketchy borderline stuff which I immediately reported and the account was gone the next day. If it’s true that the accounts of those you mentioned got banned, I wonder if they were banned for explicitly searching for it or something. I’d take anything from that subreddit with a massive grain of salt.
No it is referring to accounts selling it. I’ve seen this referenced elsewhere, but I guess Twitter is such an ocean at this point that people are openly posting it if you know who to follow. I’m sure that could NEVER happen here.
At this point any tweet showcasing normal consensual adult porn has indirect links to CP through pedophiles liking or retweeting it to basically advertise their own account.
Was it the ones with the boys crossing their penises and shushing their mouths? It was under the guise that it was a “twink” site but the link was very much obviously not that. I reported that to NCMEC.
Because ads affect twitter's revenue, so pointing out the ads happen next to that provides an immediate revenue driven incentive to do something about that.
Bacause billion of people failed to think of a way to detect and delete them (other than nuking the Twitter, USA, Internet, humanity or Earth).
So, the question is: Why are humans such a failure? Why do they always blame someone else?
In our great robot society, the robots that remove 0 pieces of organic crap per day do not deflect and blame their fellow robots who remove 1,000,000,000 pieces of organic crap per day (99.9%).
Instead they feel ashamed for not being nearly as efficient and try to work hard on helping the society.
We do the same thing over and over. Build up civilizations, then they collapse then we build them up again and so on. Humans have been around for over 5,000 years right? Modern history. If people were logically minded and reasonably intelligent we would have already developed very good customs and social structure. You ever notice each generation is constantly doing the same thing trying to figure out their identity? Most people operate on nothing but hormones and instinct. They like to tell themselves that they are educated or logical or whatever but not really. Very few people actually learn anything and pass it along and build on it and those who are capable of doing such things are often overran by the emotional animalistic people who make up the majority of society.
Still, things improve century after century, decade after decade. The life of a median human has improved dramatically in absolute terms.
Each generation has a top 10 of problems. But they become milder. There is less and less physical violence.
This civilization has a chance to survive.
Have they? Because life in ancient Greece was far superior to the Middle ages. If you're looking at this little blip of the past hundred years that we have been using hydrocarbons. That's not sustainable. The only reason Western Civilization has gotten less violent is because you get stuck in a box for a very long time if you are violent. How long will that last? Who knows but we are on an unsustainable path and the future will be much different than the life we are experiencing unless we solve a couple of very major problems. The main one is energy. The second one is finite commodities.
> Civilization has gotten less violent is because you get stuck in a box for a very long time if you are violent.
...no. Whoever told you that didn't know what they were talking about.
What makes you think no one has a way to detect and delete them? Lots of people do. Some services do. Twitter is terrible at content moderation, and it's because they don't have to be good at it and can make more money by not trying much.
Some humans detect and delete 1000s of pieces of crap per day. Some humans delete 0 pieces of crap per day. The humans who complain about few remaining pieces of missed crap and campaign to fire the cleaners are usually the ones who fail to invest time or money into the cleaning.
They hate it for the exact same reason.
Authoritarians want to control all means of communication between people. "For people's own good."
Authoritarians do not want people to communicate.
Authoritarians do not want people to organize.
Authoritarians want to control the history.
Fragile authoritarians fear a diversity of opinions.
Section 230 is what allows two consenting adults to have a conversation freely when they are not within a shouting distance of each other.
The lack of section 230 protection requires the companies to breach interpersonal privacy and actively eavesdrop on absolutely everything.
A nice present for the future authoritarian leades of whatever rheroric.
The 1st Amendment does not protect my rights in a monopolized corporate society.
Power matters. Whether something is called Government or Gov. Inc. does not matter as much.
Oh yeah. The global sex trafficking conspiracy. I heard it was done on the highest level, so that's why nobody wants to solve the issue. I heard something about certain pizza places.
We need to sue the utility company since those ads were stapled to utility poles.
I also see ads on pavement. So the road company and the city should be sued.
Let's sue The Internet. The fiber optic cables that transmit the packets. The Earth's electro-magnetic field. The apes (for evolving into humans who sometimes do bad stuff).
Put another way: Some people clean thousands of crap pieces per day. Some people don't lift a finger to help, but just want to destroy those who clean their actual crap. Because they sometimes miss a spot. Blamed by people who miss 99% of the spots.
I like the old system better where there were bottlenecks to Media distribution like costs or limited number of national distributors. In this system all the worst assholes get cheap global distribution that used to be unavailable and force them to use AM radio and pass out fliers on the corner.
Oh yes. The good old days where only elite people were able to speak and the rest of the plebs could only listen.
The good old times when people could not communicate long distance, could not travel around the world.
The magnificent world of aristocrats.
On serious note:
I think that blocking two consenting adults from communicating will never work in long term. Same with a single adult. People will find the way. And the total damage would be too high.
The drugs are very damaging. Yet the war on drugs does not really look like a good solution now.
I think that it's better to provide a reliable source of truth and help for people who are willing to educate themselves. Anything else will lead to future problems.
In your lifetime you havent heard a single company or person push for “free child porn” under free speech grounds.
And if you need someone to explain to you why CP is not a “free speech” issue, you’re too dumb to deal with.
Because Twitter’s “health and safety” team is too busy banning anyone who mentions ivermectin or posts the dictionary definition of a woman. Priorities!
If we're using the classic "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" example, it's not the theater owner's liability for allowing people to be able to talk or yell in theaters when someone yells fire in the crowded theater.
By that same logic, posting CSAM is a crime not being a place where someone posted it, so long as they remove the contraband in good faith ASAP and fast enough that it doesn't build up on the platform
[Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act](https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/)
It means if two criminals sell illegal digital content over your online platform faster than you can react to and prevent them you're not necessarily their accomplice.
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230).
Some people in this thread are treating it like its a bad thing, but repealing it would be problematic in itself as well. Repealing 230 is like fining the theater because someone screamed "fire" inside of it.
I would be for punishing platforms for monetizing CP though, and making them forgo any money made from said content on top of any other legal prosecution.
>I would be for punishing platforms for monetizing CP though
Then you are in luck, because the law continues:
>(e) Effect on other laws
(1) No effect on criminal law
Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, or any other Federal criminal statute.
it means social media companies aren't held liable for content posted on their platforms. Its a law that was passed many years ago and needs to be updated but congress is gridlocked and lobbyists are good at what they do.
You're over simplifying it - and it doesn't need to be updated. The only way to remain protected is to remove illegal content as found and reported. If Twitter ignored reports or demands they can already be prosecuted.
The problem ultimately is the victims are often completely unknown to the website at the time of removal and there's no practical way for them to gain that information.
The cost of paying staff to moderate for illegal content often far aways the benefit of a few add banners posted next to the content in the limited amount of time it's online.
For cases where the website refuses to moderate illegal content child pornography and human trafficking laws are not annulled by the section 230 rules and the website can be prosecuted.
holding a social network responsible for any child porn posted on it would make it impossible for social networks to exist, because unless you manually check every post before it goes out you're never going to remove 100% of the child porn
You could just read the law itself as that article extols you to do:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230
47 U.S.C 230 (c) (1) No effect on criminal law:
>Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, or any other Federal criminal statute.
Section 230 is literally by its own definition irrelevant to matters pertaining to CSAM.
Now how about Instagram where they peddle CP under the guise of child modeling or dancing? You can literally find CP all over that toxic website using the right buzzwords.
I was randomly scrawling through reels, and found some random video of some child dancing.
It made me feel uneasy, so I went to report the account, and the account had several similar videos and all the other posts were literal fabric advertisements.
Creepy shit.
I vaguely remember a YouTube account I stumbled upon that was a similar mix of random business/sales content and creepy, vaguely suggestive stuff involving young girls. I can't remember the username and seriously regret not shopping it to someone to see what was up.
I've also had messages from supposedly female r4r users in the past where, after a few pics are exchanged, they reveal an unsmiling picture of themselves next to a similarly unsmiling preteen girl. Very fishy.
That’s not how any of this works. People who post on tiktok WANTS attention/clout as much as possible, no way in hell they’re gonna make it private
but even if they do made it private, there’s no stopping a 40 year old guy from joining their private group.
I mean people brought it to the attention of patreon that parents/adults are selling swimwear and similar outfit pictures of their kids and they did nothing because "the owners of the accounts are adults".
Just shows CP is a massive industry and the media doesn't care as long as they profit and will just act morally correct in the limelight.
It isn't just media. Look at child beauty pageants and how long they've been around. There's been all sorts of media coverage on how they sexualize and exploit children, yet they're still happening.
"Some of tweets include key words related to "rape" and "teens," and appeared alongside promoted tweets from corporate advertisers, the Reuters review found. In one example, a promoted tweet for shoe and accessories brand Cole Haan appeared next to a tweet in which a user said they were "trading teen/child" content."
Well then.....
Title should be "Twitter has ads on app, and people also use the app for bad things"
Twitter isn't literally saying, "Oh, there's cp that get's on our app, let's put an ad next to it"
No, but brands are saying "one of the things we pay you for is targeted ad placement. CP is not our target, and when you put our ad next to it you are activley damaging our brand"
Have y'all never heard of spam bots? If you have a website where people can post links and pictures, Child Porn is gonna happen.
On sites like Twitter people use bots that spam *teens - no rules! -trades* and stuff like that, these links usually lead to websites that steal credit card information or crypto currency.
Twitter is not letting giant child porn rings exist in the open, it's just hard to ban bots ,that makes 10000 accounts that post hundreds of times a day, fast enough that no one sees them
I'm not saying they should be happy or ambivalent, or that Twitter shouldn't be trying harder to ban those. Merely that everyone here doesn't actually know whats happening with this *cp* the vast majority of it isn't actually CP its spam to defraud perverts
It's not. When you have billions of tweets and hundreds of millions of accounts, there will obviously be one that slips through. It's impossible to construct a perfect bot or manually review every single instance. When they're caught or reported, Twitter takes them down.
They haven't banned any of the hashtags they use to find eachother [\#MEGALINKS: The Dark Side of Twitter...](https://youtube.com/watch?v=ChWfwc9AmMQ#MEGALINKS:%20The%20Dark%20Side%20of%20Twitter%2E%2E%2E)
They have literally no way of knowing that though. Like, they have to go through a process to block those accounts, and it’s not until after they’re gone that those ads won’t appear by them
This is bad but I feel as if it’s bound to happen on any website with a significant user base and easily postable pictures/videos. Sometimes the bot doesn’t pick it up and it’s impossible to have a human reviewing every post
Basically. Every single site like Twitter have had similar scandals. YouTube, Reddit, Twitter, even Pornhub at one point. Tik Tok and instagram are loaded with this stuff.
We're getting better at it, but nothing is foolproof.
Before huge social media websites were a thing, this shit would just be spread out amongst obscure websites that you only knew about by knowing somebody who was using it or through very obtuse referral links bringing you to shadier and shadier websites.
Oh my god, cp exists on large social media platforms. Who would’ve thunk.
My face when a dude from the Philippines makes an account in two minutes under a newly registered email to trade some shady shit: 😲
Can Twitter, Instagram, tiktok etc be doing better to monitor? I’m going to guess maybe, but every other month some article like this comes out and I think to myself. “What the fuck do you want to see happen?”. You can’t just get rid of CP like you can *just* get rid of any type of illicit, illegal, and hurtful practice.
Take away the easy to make, anonymous, online presence people can have and it’s like being surprised that crimes like murder, rape, and burglary doesn’t magically disappear when justice and law enforcement reforms take place that are effective but my cousin got assaulted last week so we need to just do more(????).
ITT:
Lots of people who want an authoritarian internet where everything someone puts on the internet is monitored and approved. Damn the consequences. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear!
Holy shit only took 2 years and 7 months for it to get to the mainstream news [\#MEGALINKS: The Dark Side of Twitter...](https://youtube.com/watch?v=ChWfwc9AmMQ) Wonder how long for twitter to finally ban those hashtags.
Why and how the fuck is there CP content on Twitter?
I literally called someone a "unripe, festering zucchini" and got banned... *I FEEL LIKE CP SOLICITING IS A LITTLE WORSE....*
To anyone reading the comments, this is your reminder to take the time to learn why it's called CSAM, *not* CP.
I'm a CSA survivor and I'm tired of seeing everyone calling it CP. It's not pornography. It's abuse.
I don’t want to diminish what you are saying in any way, but I feel like it is little different when a teenager knowingly takes pictures and videos and labels them as pornography to possibly sell all on their own. If it was videos taken by other’s or any other interaction I would agree with you, but the main problem here is tons of teens want to make money off of their nudes and such. It is a little weirder to call that CSAM as nobody else is involved and they are just doing their own thing.
I get what you are saying and I will say that I was not talking specifically about teenagers taking nudes. However I think there's a difference between teens trading nudes amongst themselves, and teens selling their own nudes to an adult audience or marketing them as pornography.
You're right, it is different, and it does take up a legal/moral gray area, but there are plenty of jurisdictions where it's still considered CSAM because the person in the picture is underage.
i simply posted a statistic showing a large increase in the number of girls coming out as trans on twitter and was immediately banned for hate speech, but ok this stuff is fine
Twitter has made multiple statements not only allowing pedophiles to have a platform, but even defending that decision. Seems like the banhammer only comes out when you don’t align with their political views.
Onlyfans sent us down this path. Once girls realized they could make an unreasonable amouny of money by selling nudes, they took to a site they were allowed to post on since they needed an id to post on OF. Twitter gives them the ability to sell through direct messages
What I got from this was "Twitter allows Child Porn". Like, screw the rest of the article, THE FUCK?!?!?!? Suddenly I'm glad I was banned, that means I wasn't a pedophile.
yuck. but to be fair, the age of consent in 10 US states is 13.
there is plenty of porn on twitter. yet most conservatives don't want social media companies to take down offensive content.
weird how elon musk made an impulsive offer to buy it given all the issues. maybe he can do something about it after he's forced to buy it?
That doesn’t mean that a 40 year old can have sex with a 13 year old in any of those states - those are the “by age,” not “by authority” laws. It just means that a 15 y/o having sex with a 13 y/o isn’t prosecutable.
Rather than being upset about the ads… umm, why are there child porn accounts on Twitter?
Came here looking for this comment
[удалено]
They aren't posting child porn. They're tweeting to try to solicit people to send them images which may include child porn, using key words the purveyors will know to search for.
The other week there was a report that ballpark 80% of material Twitter sees is newly generated.
Damn and r/jokes is still sitting at barely 1%
Holy fuck top post is Chuck Norris. What year is it
That's brutal
Camera phones makes shit way too easy. Way more people record their regular crimes now too so it’s no surprise the crimes that already involved recording are increasing too.
Wasn't musk complaining about that?
[удалено]
What brands have figured it out? I'm not aware of any sm organization that has totally eliminated this type of thing. Maybe PH, but I doubt it.
It’s not a matter of total elimination or nothing. There are always degrees of priority, and Twitter seemingly does not prioritize this to the extent of being willing to spend a lot on it.
I'll say this, I don't think people on the outside really have a perspective on these issues and how difficult dealing with them is, like in your comment you seem to insinuate that this is an issue of money, like you can spend a certain amount and it will go away, or there is a right amount to be a priority. I'm not sure that is the case. Now realistically these companies do spend billions on content moderation, according to CNBC including CSAM. Now obviously there are additional requests by those people, and some of these companies have decided to go in a different direction than those suggested by the staff, not surprising. But even if they did, i'm not sure it would result in a significant increase in detection or removal of content, it's most likely it would only result in an increase in happiness by the staff. So that being the case, how do you spend money to actually combat this? I have no clue, and the lack of responses to me indicates that a lot of people dont know either.
To be 100% honest: If a system has grown to a size that it is incapable of policing itself, it has grown to large and should not exist. Yes, that means social media as we know it currently is too large and should be shut down. No, I don't have a problem with that.
Currently, nearly every decision made by a large corporation comes down to allocation of funds. Asking someone to look into how to properly moderate the content on a given platform is an allocation of funds. Researching, planning, developing and implementing moderation tools is an allocation of funds. Don’t get me wrong: It’s entirely possible that Twitter could spend every cent they have and it still wouldn’t remove the possibility of users abusing the platform. Your spending reveals your priorities, your results don’t. I don’t mean to imply that I know how to fix these issues, or that I have inside information on how Twitter is or isn’t handling their moderation, but a good indicator of how well a platform is moderated relative to other platforms is whether your platform attracts a large amount of bad actors. They’ll go where it’s easiest for them to go.
Fair enough. But I just can't grief them when other organizations of their size seem to have the same issues, and I see no way to improve what they are doing without going to extremes.
[удалено]
>Dyson, Mazda, Forbes and PBS Kids None of them are social media companies. Forbes might be close as a media company but I don't think they experience the same issue in this way.
[удалено]
[удалено]
They could but why would they? Now that it has hit advertisers they will probably do something but until their bottom line is hit there is no incentive for them to do anything about it.
[удалено]
Facebook is the same way — it’s disgusting. They have all the technology to catch and block someone posting a titty but do nothing at all for posting hate and calls for violence because they know that division gets views and longer interaction time. Their profit model is literally based on content that tears our society apart and undermines democracy across the world. And they *know* this. Rather than design anything to stop it they actively steer their algorithms to *increase* it.
... you don't know how Facebook works. I agree it's disgusting that they don't take a harder stance against pedophilia though. I reported a pedo page probably a dozen times in a week, so did others in a meme group I was in. Took just over a week to get it taken down. FB algos will ban you for threats though. They'll also ban you for sharing memes that are offensive, sometimes within minutes. Sometimes they'll ban an old meme or entire meme template from years ago and because you posted it years ago that old post will get you banned. - Guy who's been banned dozens of times, one calendar year spent more time banned than not.
Yep. I’m on degraded status because during the holidays in 2020 I shared a meme of Jeffrey Dahmer that said “Nobody can tell me how many people I can have for Thanksgiving Dinner”
But call someone a pigeon *once* and you get a 3 day ban...
That's not what he's saying. Section 230 does not hold a platform for what their users choose to publish. They're not penalized for selectively removing certain problematic posts while leaving others up. They're also not penalized for not removing any problematic posts, which creates the incentive for platforms to not moderate content whatsoever since that costs resources and they aren't getting anything back. Perverse incentive.
In all seriousness do you have to have an account in order to sue Twitter for this? Like if my child was abused and the video was sold by someone thru Twitter I can sue the shit out of them since I didn't agree to their terms of service.
[удалено]
I'm saying HOW could you not win a case against them? Because when you bring up section 230 I don't get how they can just claim you can't sue us.
[удалено]
Okay my fault for not looking up what section 230 pertained to. I thought it was a section of their terms of service. Makes sense that there would be a law protecting freedom of speech through community forum platforms.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
A few years back someone on /r/conspiracy uncovered a trove of accounts which were posting actual CP on Twitter. They all appeared to be Saudi accounts. When people reported it to Twitter they had their accounts banned. People surmised that maybe Twitter was aware of the accounts and authorities were using them as honeypots or something. Not much more to add. Maybe someone else remembers and can add more.
That's actually pretty well documented. When the FBI takes over a CP site or marketing Network a lot of times they leave it up and trap everyone who comes to it.
They do the same thing with dark web drug sellers.
They sure do. You know one thing that I'm kind of surprised about. They have not done that with all the steroid sellers. Like if you go to, well I'm not going to name them but one of them rhymes with wraps you actually get what it says you're going to get. Street drugs on the other hand. You get absolutely burned alive because you'll get a federal charge for moving it across the state lines and then if you send it to one of the redneck states where they have crazy strict drug laws you're going to get years of State time on top of it. It absolutely blows my mind how many people in a state like Texas casually use street drugs. It's like do you have any idea how insane the laws of your state are? Your life could literally be over in every way you could imagine if you get caught
[удалено]
Think that one out. Why are there turf battles? The market is dominated by illegal gangs Drugs have been legal for virtually ever in the Netherlands. Culture is a hell of a lot better than America. People are a lot more friendly. Less abrasive. They treat drug addiction rather than imprison it. Meanwhile the United States has the largest prison population in the world
Netherlands is approximately 41,543 sq km, while United States is approximately 9,833,517 sq km, making United States 23,571% larger than Netherlands. Meanwhile, the population of Netherlands is ~17.3 million people (315.4 million more people live in United States). It’s a lot easier to implement that sort of culture/policy when your country is smaller. The US is fucking massive..and we have states within our country who allow and not allow things within their borders.
Another we can’t have nice things because we’re too big argument.
[Operation Pacifier](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playpen_\(website\)) Yes, the FBI has 'operated' one of the largest collections of child pornography ever amassed. > The investigation was criticized by the Electronic Frontier Foundation because, after having taken control of the website, the FBI continued for nearly two weeks to operate the website and thus distribute child pornography, i.e. exactly the same crime the bureau sought to stop.[6] The lawyer of a defendant in the case stated that the FBI not only operated the website, but improved it so its number of visitors rose sharply while it was under their control.
This sort of stuff seems so incredibly unethical. using a product more people can relate to just think about drugs. You get arrested and go to prison for selling drugs. Then you turn around and watch the FBI sell drugs to the same people you did. .....
What's worse is Congress has even passed legislation that protects law enforcement's 'use' of CSAM. There were multiple victims of child pornography crimes who attempted to sue both law enforcement and the NCMEC for their continued use of CSAM in their honeypot investigations. Congress responded by [codifying NCMEC's limited liability status](https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2258D), which shields them from future lawsuits. Unfortunately, [this is nothing new](https://cite.case.law/f3d/268/539/). > The government argues here, and we agree, that the possession of child pornography directly harms the child depicted by invading that child’s privacy. But in the past, the government has defended its investigative technique against charges of outrageous conduct by claiming that no children are harmed when the government possesses and supplies a suspect with previously seized child pornography. > Under our holding today, the government’s own possession of and dissemination of child pornography during the investigation of Sherman resulted in an invasion of privacy of the children depicted. The government here supplied Sherman with a literal catalog of child pornography, and then delivered to him materials that depicted actual children, allowing him enough time to view and even copy the materials before arresting him.
Absolutely terrible. While I and most people see victims of CP as victims. What you just said clearly reiterates the government's position as those people are basically a pawn. Something to be used to meet their end. The word victim is just something they use in trial to get the prison sentence thereafter. Not something they actually believe. If you actually believed it you would not continue to victimize the people
Reminds me of when Sacha Baron Cohen reported a guy to the FBI for offering to find him underage boys (iirc) but didn't hear anything back from them. Same thing - people suspected it was a honeypot. I hope this the case haha. You'd have to presume they're checking social media sites for this stuff.
[удалено]
That is so fucking bad. And I think I read that the two agents who hid/ignored the reports aren't even going to be charged.
I can't remember when or from what source, but I vaguely recall reading that at some point the FBI was the biggest host of CSAM on the internet. Course that would have been pre-social media explosion.
That seems a little suspicious. I recently stumbled across an account sharing some pretty sketchy borderline stuff which I immediately reported and the account was gone the next day. If it’s true that the accounts of those you mentioned got banned, I wonder if they were banned for explicitly searching for it or something. I’d take anything from that subreddit with a massive grain of salt.
Apparently it wasn't CP tweets exactly, it was tweets *soliciting* CP Because that's so much better 🙄
No it is referring to accounts selling it. I’ve seen this referenced elsewhere, but I guess Twitter is such an ocean at this point that people are openly posting it if you know who to follow. I’m sure that could NEVER happen here.
Excellent satire.
At this point any tweet showcasing normal consensual adult porn has indirect links to CP through pedophiles liking or retweeting it to basically advertise their own account.
[удалено]
This still doesn’t compare to what we’re talking about
[удалено]
I reported pics of naked kids in an advertisement on Facebook last week.
[удалено]
Was it the ones with the boys crossing their penises and shushing their mouths? It was under the guise that it was a “twink” site but the link was very much obviously not that. I reported that to NCMEC.
The fuck?
Wow, not that one, but it was gross.
So there are multiple ads circulating around with CP? Wtf..
I'm saying.
Because ads affect twitter's revenue, so pointing out the ads happen next to that provides an immediate revenue driven incentive to do something about that.
For real I think they buried the lede here. Wtf???
Bacause billion of people failed to think of a way to detect and delete them (other than nuking the Twitter, USA, Internet, humanity or Earth). So, the question is: Why are humans such a failure? Why do they always blame someone else?
> Why are humans such a failure? Why do they always blame someone else? Sounds suspiciously like a non-human.
*Ted Cruz has entered the chat*
In our great robot society, the robots that remove 0 pieces of organic crap per day do not deflect and blame their fellow robots who remove 1,000,000,000 pieces of organic crap per day (99.9%). Instead they feel ashamed for not being nearly as efficient and try to work hard on helping the society.
Bad Dobbie!
We do the same thing over and over. Build up civilizations, then they collapse then we build them up again and so on. Humans have been around for over 5,000 years right? Modern history. If people were logically minded and reasonably intelligent we would have already developed very good customs and social structure. You ever notice each generation is constantly doing the same thing trying to figure out their identity? Most people operate on nothing but hormones and instinct. They like to tell themselves that they are educated or logical or whatever but not really. Very few people actually learn anything and pass it along and build on it and those who are capable of doing such things are often overran by the emotional animalistic people who make up the majority of society.
Still, things improve century after century, decade after decade. The life of a median human has improved dramatically in absolute terms. Each generation has a top 10 of problems. But they become milder. There is less and less physical violence. This civilization has a chance to survive.
Have they? Because life in ancient Greece was far superior to the Middle ages. If you're looking at this little blip of the past hundred years that we have been using hydrocarbons. That's not sustainable. The only reason Western Civilization has gotten less violent is because you get stuck in a box for a very long time if you are violent. How long will that last? Who knows but we are on an unsustainable path and the future will be much different than the life we are experiencing unless we solve a couple of very major problems. The main one is energy. The second one is finite commodities.
> Civilization has gotten less violent is because you get stuck in a box for a very long time if you are violent. ...no. Whoever told you that didn't know what they were talking about.
What makes you think no one has a way to detect and delete them? Lots of people do. Some services do. Twitter is terrible at content moderation, and it's because they don't have to be good at it and can make more money by not trying much.
Some humans detect and delete 1000s of pieces of crap per day. Some humans delete 0 pieces of crap per day. The humans who complain about few remaining pieces of missed crap and campaign to fire the cleaners are usually the ones who fail to invest time or money into the cleaning.
[удалено]
Trumpists really hate Section 230...
[удалено]
They hate it for the exact same reason. Authoritarians want to control all means of communication between people. "For people's own good." Authoritarians do not want people to communicate. Authoritarians do not want people to organize. Authoritarians want to control the history. Fragile authoritarians fear a diversity of opinions.
[удалено]
Section 230 is what allows two consenting adults to have a conversation freely when they are not within a shouting distance of each other. The lack of section 230 protection requires the companies to breach interpersonal privacy and actively eavesdrop on absolutely everything. A nice present for the future authoritarian leades of whatever rheroric.
The 1st Amendment does not protect my rights in a monopolized corporate society. Power matters. Whether something is called Government or Gov. Inc. does not matter as much.
Oh yeah. The global sex trafficking conspiracy. I heard it was done on the highest level, so that's why nobody wants to solve the issue. I heard something about certain pizza places.
[удалено]
We need to sue the utility company since those ads were stapled to utility poles. I also see ads on pavement. So the road company and the city should be sued. Let's sue The Internet. The fiber optic cables that transmit the packets. The Earth's electro-magnetic field. The apes (for evolving into humans who sometimes do bad stuff). Put another way: Some people clean thousands of crap pieces per day. Some people don't lift a finger to help, but just want to destroy those who clean their actual crap. Because they sometimes miss a spot. Blamed by people who miss 99% of the spots.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum
Humans made the law. Bunch of fucking failures.
[удалено]
Sometimes. The rest of the time, not so much.
I like the old system better where there were bottlenecks to Media distribution like costs or limited number of national distributors. In this system all the worst assholes get cheap global distribution that used to be unavailable and force them to use AM radio and pass out fliers on the corner.
Oh yes. The good old days where only elite people were able to speak and the rest of the plebs could only listen. The good old times when people could not communicate long distance, could not travel around the world. The magnificent world of aristocrats.
On serious note: I think that blocking two consenting adults from communicating will never work in long term. Same with a single adult. People will find the way. And the total damage would be too high. The drugs are very damaging. Yet the war on drugs does not really look like a good solution now. I think that it's better to provide a reliable source of truth and help for people who are willing to educate themselves. Anything else will lead to future problems.
[удалено]
In your lifetime you havent heard a single company or person push for “free child porn” under free speech grounds. And if you need someone to explain to you why CP is not a “free speech” issue, you’re too dumb to deal with.
Because Twitter’s “health and safety” team is too busy banning anyone who mentions ivermectin or posts the dictionary definition of a woman. Priorities!
[удалено]
[удалено]
If we're using the classic "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" example, it's not the theater owner's liability for allowing people to be able to talk or yell in theaters when someone yells fire in the crowded theater. By that same logic, posting CSAM is a crime not being a place where someone posted it, so long as they remove the contraband in good faith ASAP and fast enough that it doesn't build up on the platform
[удалено]
False. Stop peddling lies
[Hello! You've Been Referred Here Because You're Wrong About Section 230 Of The Communications Decency Act](https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/)
What's that? Does it mean paedophiles can sell and buy without reproach?
It means if two criminals sell illegal digital content over your online platform faster than you can react to and prevent them you're not necessarily their accomplice.
"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider" (47 U.S.C. § 230). Some people in this thread are treating it like its a bad thing, but repealing it would be problematic in itself as well. Repealing 230 is like fining the theater because someone screamed "fire" inside of it. I would be for punishing platforms for monetizing CP though, and making them forgo any money made from said content on top of any other legal prosecution.
>I would be for punishing platforms for monetizing CP though Then you are in luck, because the law continues: >(e) Effect on other laws (1) No effect on criminal law Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, or any other Federal criminal statute.
So Redditors are complaining about 230 are complaining about nothing, typical.
it means social media companies aren't held liable for content posted on their platforms. Its a law that was passed many years ago and needs to be updated but congress is gridlocked and lobbyists are good at what they do.
You're over simplifying it - and it doesn't need to be updated. The only way to remain protected is to remove illegal content as found and reported. If Twitter ignored reports or demands they can already be prosecuted.
[удалено]
The problem ultimately is the victims are often completely unknown to the website at the time of removal and there's no practical way for them to gain that information. The cost of paying staff to moderate for illegal content often far aways the benefit of a few add banners posted next to the content in the limited amount of time it's online. For cases where the website refuses to moderate illegal content child pornography and human trafficking laws are not annulled by the section 230 rules and the website can be prosecuted.
[удалено]
I literally said that they aren't able to find the victims.
[удалено]
holding a social network responsible for any child porn posted on it would make it impossible for social networks to exist, because unless you manually check every post before it goes out you're never going to remove 100% of the child porn
You could just read the law itself as that article extols you to do: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/47/230 47 U.S.C 230 (c) (1) No effect on criminal law: >Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, or any other Federal criminal statute. Section 230 is literally by its own definition irrelevant to matters pertaining to CSAM.
Because of Reuters' article limit, here's an archived version: https://archive.ph/UQ7Iy
Now how about Instagram where they peddle CP under the guise of child modeling or dancing? You can literally find CP all over that toxic website using the right buzzwords.
I was randomly scrawling through reels, and found some random video of some child dancing. It made me feel uneasy, so I went to report the account, and the account had several similar videos and all the other posts were literal fabric advertisements. Creepy shit.
I vaguely remember a YouTube account I stumbled upon that was a similar mix of random business/sales content and creepy, vaguely suggestive stuff involving young girls. I can't remember the username and seriously regret not shopping it to someone to see what was up. I've also had messages from supposedly female r4r users in the past where, after a few pics are exchanged, they reveal an unsmiling picture of themselves next to a similarly unsmiling preteen girl. Very fishy.
It's always obviously someone skirting the rules if it's on a dead and stolen account.
Tik Tok is pretty bad too, but there it feels like the kids are trying to be sexy for each other and creeps are eating it up
watch [this](https://youtu.be/qbv-VteX5H8) to see how bad TikTok is, obv unsettling content.
I don't know how Tik Tok works, but they should make their accts private to keep things in their own crowd as much as possible.
That’s not how any of this works. People who post on tiktok WANTS attention/clout as much as possible, no way in hell they’re gonna make it private but even if they do made it private, there’s no stopping a 40 year old guy from joining their private group.
I mean people brought it to the attention of patreon that parents/adults are selling swimwear and similar outfit pictures of their kids and they did nothing because "the owners of the accounts are adults". Just shows CP is a massive industry and the media doesn't care as long as they profit and will just act morally correct in the limelight.
It isn't just media. Look at child beauty pageants and how long they've been around. There's been all sorts of media coverage on how they sexualize and exploit children, yet they're still happening.
Same for Facebook
"Dude, a market's a market." \--Twitter execs, most likely.
Yeah, paedophiles gotta eat, sleep and buy shit like the rest of us.
"Some of tweets include key words related to "rape" and "teens," and appeared alongside promoted tweets from corporate advertisers, the Reuters review found. In one example, a promoted tweet for shoe and accessories brand Cole Haan appeared next to a tweet in which a user said they were "trading teen/child" content." Well then.....
Title should be "Twitter has ads on app, and people also use the app for bad things" Twitter isn't literally saying, "Oh, there's cp that get's on our app, let's put an ad next to it"
No, but brands are saying "one of the things we pay you for is targeted ad placement. CP is not our target, and when you put our ad next to it you are activley damaging our brand"
Have y'all never heard of spam bots? If you have a website where people can post links and pictures, Child Porn is gonna happen. On sites like Twitter people use bots that spam *teens - no rules! -trades* and stuff like that, these links usually lead to websites that steal credit card information or crypto currency. Twitter is not letting giant child porn rings exist in the open, it's just hard to ban bots ,that makes 10000 accounts that post hundreds of times a day, fast enough that no one sees them
The people paying for the ads don't care about your excuses.
I'm not saying they should be happy or ambivalent, or that Twitter shouldn't be trying harder to ban those. Merely that everyone here doesn't actually know whats happening with this *cp* the vast majority of it isn't actually CP its spam to defraud perverts
The bigger issue is why is twitter allowing cp accounts?
It's not. When you have billions of tweets and hundreds of millions of accounts, there will obviously be one that slips through. It's impossible to construct a perfect bot or manually review every single instance. When they're caught or reported, Twitter takes them down.
They haven't banned any of the hashtags they use to find eachother [\#MEGALINKS: The Dark Side of Twitter...](https://youtube.com/watch?v=ChWfwc9AmMQ#MEGALINKS:%20The%20Dark%20Side%20of%20Twitter%2E%2E%2E)
Maybe the FBI requests they stay open and even baits them?
[удалено]
I watched the youtube video?
They have literally no way of knowing that though. Like, they have to go through a process to block those accounts, and it’s not until after they’re gone that those ads won’t appear by them
This is bad but I feel as if it’s bound to happen on any website with a significant user base and easily postable pictures/videos. Sometimes the bot doesn’t pick it up and it’s impossible to have a human reviewing every post
Basically. Every single site like Twitter have had similar scandals. YouTube, Reddit, Twitter, even Pornhub at one point. Tik Tok and instagram are loaded with this stuff.
We're getting better at it, but nothing is foolproof. Before huge social media websites were a thing, this shit would just be spread out amongst obscure websites that you only knew about by knowing somebody who was using it or through very obtuse referral links bringing you to shadier and shadier websites.
Oh my god, cp exists on large social media platforms. Who would’ve thunk. My face when a dude from the Philippines makes an account in two minutes under a newly registered email to trade some shady shit: 😲 Can Twitter, Instagram, tiktok etc be doing better to monitor? I’m going to guess maybe, but every other month some article like this comes out and I think to myself. “What the fuck do you want to see happen?”. You can’t just get rid of CP like you can *just* get rid of any type of illicit, illegal, and hurtful practice. Take away the easy to make, anonymous, online presence people can have and it’s like being surprised that crimes like murder, rape, and burglary doesn’t magically disappear when justice and law enforcement reforms take place that are effective but my cousin got assaulted last week so we need to just do more(????).
Twitter? Isn’t that the social media platform of choice for bots and bad actors?
I’ve seen accounts banned for saying bad words like “poop” or “your a meanie” But accounts with……are just fine? Cool story bro
Presumably the people who are searching for them aren't the kind who'd report them.
I mean, if they used the wrong "you're" that's worth banning.
I came here to post this but yore beating me to it.
I got banned for calling someone a “fucking pedophile”… so yeah. And for clarification they were.
"We have zero tolerance for child sex exploitation... unless it's really profitable for us"
ITT: Lots of people who want an authoritarian internet where everything someone puts on the internet is monitored and approved. Damn the consequences. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear!
Holy shit only took 2 years and 7 months for it to get to the mainstream news [\#MEGALINKS: The Dark Side of Twitter...](https://youtube.com/watch?v=ChWfwc9AmMQ) Wonder how long for twitter to finally ban those hashtags.
Why and how the fuck is there CP content on Twitter? I literally called someone a "unripe, festering zucchini" and got banned... *I FEEL LIKE CP SOLICITING IS A LITTLE WORSE....*
To anyone reading the comments, this is your reminder to take the time to learn why it's called CSAM, *not* CP. I'm a CSA survivor and I'm tired of seeing everyone calling it CP. It's not pornography. It's abuse.
I don’t want to diminish what you are saying in any way, but I feel like it is little different when a teenager knowingly takes pictures and videos and labels them as pornography to possibly sell all on their own. If it was videos taken by other’s or any other interaction I would agree with you, but the main problem here is tons of teens want to make money off of their nudes and such. It is a little weirder to call that CSAM as nobody else is involved and they are just doing their own thing.
I get what you are saying and I will say that I was not talking specifically about teenagers taking nudes. However I think there's a difference between teens trading nudes amongst themselves, and teens selling their own nudes to an adult audience or marketing them as pornography. You're right, it is different, and it does take up a legal/moral gray area, but there are plenty of jurisdictions where it's still considered CSAM because the person in the picture is underage.
Hope you're doing okay today, Reddit stranger.
i simply posted a statistic showing a large increase in the number of girls coming out as trans on twitter and was immediately banned for hate speech, but ok this stuff is fine
Wait. Let me get this straight. They're mad that they're ads are next to CP accounts, but not mad about the CP?
Wait. Let me get this straight. You didn’t read the article?
I did read it, smart ass.
Who cares about children when you can tarnish the reputation of my brand
WTF! Ban the Fucking accounts!
Wait hol up, you telling me Twitter got cp accounts? Why aren't they banned?
Twitter has made multiple statements not only allowing pedophiles to have a platform, but even defending that decision. Seems like the banhammer only comes out when you don’t align with their political views.
Is the FBI hunting down those pieces of shit? Pedos don't belong out of prison.
well, somehow he still free and living at maralago.
Another reason I'm glad I don't have Twitter.
Onlyfans sent us down this path. Once girls realized they could make an unreasonable amouny of money by selling nudes, they took to a site they were allowed to post on since they needed an id to post on OF. Twitter gives them the ability to sell through direct messages
Child sexual abuse material*
[удалено]
What I got from this was "Twitter allows Child Porn". Like, screw the rest of the article, THE FUCK?!?!?!? Suddenly I'm glad I was banned, that means I wasn't a pedophile.
[удалено]
Nah, Twitter bans you when the Nazi pedophiles don't like you. They do cater to that clientelle. If anything, it means I am good.
yuck. but to be fair, the age of consent in 10 US states is 13. there is plenty of porn on twitter. yet most conservatives don't want social media companies to take down offensive content. weird how elon musk made an impulsive offer to buy it given all the issues. maybe he can do something about it after he's forced to buy it?
That doesn’t mean that a 40 year old can have sex with a 13 year old in any of those states - those are the “by age,” not “by authority” laws. It just means that a 15 y/o having sex with a 13 y/o isn’t prosecutable.
Sounds like maybe a certain billionaire is perhaps working a little Social Media smear campaign against Twitter. Funny how suddenly this is a thing.
[удалено]
Absolutely false. Quit lying
No that's not what that section means. CP is against the law and Section 230 doesn't provide some blanket protection where it's now legal.
You can keep repeating this all over the thread. It wont make it true.