Tag: Twitter

Categories
Health

Twitter closes San Francisco, New York places of work as Covid circumstances surge

Twitter closes San Francisco, New York offices as Covid cases surge

Pedestrians use cell phones as they walk past Twitter Inc. headquarters in San Francisco, California, USA

Bloomberg | Getty Images

Twitter has announced that it will immediately close its offices in San Francisco and New York as Covid cases increase across the country.

Wednesday’s announcement comes just two weeks after the social media company reopened its offices in both cities.

“After carefully reviewing the CDC’s updated guidelines, and given current conditions, Twitter has decided to close our New York and San Francisco offices and to suspend future office openings with immediate effect,” a Twitter spokesman said in a statement Wednesday.

The company added that it continues to closely monitor local conditions and make necessary changes that “prioritize the health and safety of our Tweeps”.

Twitter is the newest company in the Bay Area to either delay its reopening or to close its offices due to the Delta variant.

On Wednesday, Google announced that it would postpone the return of the offices until October. One month later than the original September date.

This story evolves. Stay with NBC Bay Area for updates.

Categories
Politics

Twitter Suspends Marjorie Taylor Greene for Posting Coronavirus Misinformation

Twitter Suspends Marjorie Taylor Greene for Posting Coronavirus Misinformation

SAN FRANCISCO – Twitter announced Monday that Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene would be suspended from her duty for 12 hours after posting news that violated her policy on disclosing misleading information about the coronavirus.

Ms. Greene, a Republican from Georgia, was a staunch opponent of vaccines and masks as a means of containing the pandemic. In tweets on Sunday and Monday, she argued that Covid-19 is not dangerous for people unless they are obese or over 65 and said vaccines shouldn’t be required.

But coronavirus cases are on the rise, and the highly contagious Delta variant accounts for more than half of new infections in the U.S., federal health officials said this month. In Ms. Greene’s home state of Georgia, new cases have increased 193 percent in the past two weeks.

Twitter said Ms. Greene’s tweets were misinformation and banned her from duty until Tuesday. “We have taken enforcement action against the @mtgreenee account for violating the Twitter rules, in particular the misleading Covid 19 information guidelines,” said a Twitter spokesman. The company also added labels to Ms. Greene’s posts about the vaccines, calling them “misleading” and pointing out information about the safety of the vaccines.

In a statement, Ms. Greene said Silicon Valley companies are working with the White House to attack freedom of expression. “These big tech companies are doing the Biden regime’s commandments to restrict our voices and prevent the distribution of messages that are not state-approved,” she said.

Twitter took action after President Biden urged social media companies to do more to combat the spread of vaccine misinformation on their platforms. On Friday, Mr Biden said sites like Facebook “kill people” by allowing misinformation to flourish freely, adding, “Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated, and that – and they are killing people . “

His statement ended weeks of frustration in the White House over the spread of online misinformation that resulted in hesitant vaccination, health officials say.

Facebook, which took the brunt of the criticism, argued that Mr Biden’s testimony was unfounded. “The Biden government has chosen to blame a handful of American social media companies,” said Guy Rosen, Facebook’s vice president of integrity, in a blog post on Saturday. “The fact is that the adoption of vaccines by Facebook users in the US has increased.”

On Monday, the president softened his criticism, saying that it was not Facebook but certain users who were responsible for the spread of misinformation. The company should do more to combat “the outrageous misinformation” spreading on its platform, rather than taking what he said as a personal insult, added Mr Biden.

Twitter has long banned users from sharing misinformation about the coronavirus that could cause harm. In March, the company introduced a policy outlining penalties for sharing lies about the virus and vaccines.

Updated

July 19, 2021, 9:32 p.m. ET

“We have seen the emergence of persistent conspiracy theories, alarmist rhetoric that is unfounded in research or credible reporting, and a wide range of unfounded rumors that, out of context, can deter the public from making informed decisions about their health and individuals, Families and communities at risk, “the company said in its policy against the disclosure of Covid misinformation.

Individuals who violate this policy are subject to escalating penalties known as strikes and could face a permanent ban if they repeatedly spread misinformation about the virus. A twelve-hour ban, as Ms. Greene learns, is Twitter’s response to users who have either two or three strikes. After four strikes, Twitter bans users for seven days, and after five strikes, Twitter bans the user altogether.

Other Republicans who have been banned from Twitter have complained that the social media company is censoring them.

In January, Twitter banned President Donald J. Trump after the company found his social media posts played a role in inciting violence during the riot in the U.S. Capitol. Mr Trump has argued that Twitter and Facebook, which also blocked his account, censored him, saying the companies need government oversight.

Ms. Greene had previously been banned from Twitter in April, but the company said it was a bug caused by one of its automated spam and abuse detection systems.

“Everyone knows this is a LIE and it wasn’t a mistake,” Ms. Greene tweeted after her suspension was lifted.

Categories
Business

Twitter Calls on Indian Authorities to Respect Free Speech

Twitter Calls on Indian Government to Respect Free Speech

NEW DELHI – Twitter on Thursday opposed India’s increasingly persistent efforts to control online language, urged the government to respect freedom of expression and criticized the country’s police force “intimidating” tactics.

The statement comes as Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Indian government faces mounting pressure to deal with a devastating second wave of the coronavirus. Many of these complaints have been broadcast on Twitter and elsewhere online.

The government has tried hard to get the narrative back. On Thursday, Twitter said it had received a notice of non-compliance with Indian information technology laws. The notice asked the company to remove content critical of the government’s handling of the coronavirus and farmers’ protests, including some published by journalists, activists and politicians.

Under Indian law, Twitter executives in India could face up to seven years’ imprisonment if the company fails to follow government instructions to remove content it deems subversive or a threat to public order and national security adheres to.

In its statement, the San Francisco-based social media service said it plans to persuade India’s leaders to change new regulations that give authorities more leverage over online platforms.

“At the moment we are concerned about recent events regarding our workforce in India and the potential threat to freedom of expression for the people we serve,” the statement said.

Citing the new information technology regulations, he added, “We have concerns, along with many in civil society in India and around the world, about the police’s use of intimidation tactics in response to enforcement of our global terms of use, as well as core elements of the new IT rules. “

Twitter’s statement came just days after officers from an elite counter-terrorism police force visited the company’s New Delhi offices. They protested the way the company had labeled posts by high-ranking officials from India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)

These officials had posted documents on Twitter that provided evidence that opposition politicians were planning to use the country’s coronavirus crisis as a political stick. Twitter described them as “manipulated media” in response to allegations that the documents were forged.

Even before the coronavirus hit, Mr Modi’s government and the BJP had taken ever stronger steps to contain disagreements in the 1.4 billion country.

In February, Twitter blocked over 500 accounts and removed an unspecified number of other accounts in India after the government accused those accounts of making inflammatory remarks about Mr Modi in connection with protests by angry farmers. Farmers have been camping outside of New Delhi for at least six months to protest the farming laws.

Twitter previously said it would not take action against accounts owned by media organizations, journalists, activists or politicians, and it did not believe the order to block those accounts was “in accordance with Indian law.”

However, on Thursday the company admitted that it had withheld some unverified accounts in these categories from India despite believing the content was “legitimate free speech” under Indian and international law. The company announced last week that it was reopening its review process to allow government officials, media organizations, journalists and activists to apply for a blue tick, a token of credibility online, a process that has been on hold since 2017.

In April, Mr Modi’s government ordered Facebook, Instagram and Twitter to remove dozens of social media posts that were critical of how the pandemic was being handled. The order was addressed to around 100 opposition politicians and included calls for Mr. Modi to step down.

Under the new Internet rules in India, social media companies are required to appoint India-based executives who may be criminally liable for violations and create systems to track and identify the “first author” of posts or messages sent by as The government is classified as “offensive”.

The rules apply to a wide variety of media, including digital news agencies, streaming services like Netflix and Amazon, and social media platforms. According to the regulations announced in February, social media companies were given Tuesday to identify the executives who could be held liable. Streaming services and news agencies were not affected by this particular rule.

Twitter called the requirement “dangerous overreach that is inconsistent with open, democratic principles”. On Wednesday, WhatsApp sued the Indian government in a highly unusual move by Facebook’s own messaging platform, arguing that the guidelines were unconstitutional. Digital rights advocates and groups say the rules could fundamentally change the way Indians use the internet.

“The IT rules violate India’s democratic framework and constitutional guarantees,” said Apar Gupta, executive director of the Internet Freedom Foundation, a rights group. “Several requirements among them are unconstitutional and undermine freedom of expression and privacy for millions of Internet users in India.”

Understand India’s Covid Crisis

India isn’t the only country that has tried to enforce stricter regulations on the internet. The steps have raised questions about how freedom of speech can be reconciled with security and privacy.

In the US, politicians have targeted big tech companies like Facebook and Amazon to influence what people buy and read and how companies treat users’ personal information. European officials are working on new laws that would give the government more powers to remove misinformation and other material deemed toxic.

On Thursday, the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, the Indian branch of government that pressured Twitter to remove material, released a response to the companies’ statement on Koo, a competing service.

“The new rules are only intended to prevent abuse and abuse of social media,” Ravi Shankar Prasad, India’s Minister of Electronics and Information Technology, said in the statement. “The government welcomes criticism, including the right to ask questions.”

In a separate statement on Thursday, the ministry criticized Twitter for its comments, calling them “completely unfounded, false and an attempt to defame India”. The protection of freedom of expression in India is not the “prerogative” of the company.

Last week, the government urged social media platforms, including Twitter and Facebook, to remove all content related to coronavirus variants in India, especially those that indicated the variants were spreading in other countries. Twitter confirmed that it had received the request but had not removed the posts until Thursday evening. Facebook did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

At least one of the variants first seen in India, known as B.1.617.2, now outperforms all other versions of the virus in the UK, scientists in the UK have said, and is present in at least 48 other countries. The government request called this claim “totally wrong”.

Free speech attorneys said the government has no legal basis to ask social media platforms to remove this content, which could apply to news reports and major scientific discussions about the virus in India, where it continues to kill thousands of people every day The country’s health system far beyond its borders.

“The new rules are like a choke collar,” said Devdutta Mukhopadhyay, a lawyer working on freedom of speech in India. “The government will pull on it if it wants to.”

Categories
Politics

Supreme Courtroom erases ruling in opposition to Trump over his Twitter account

Supreme Court erases ruling against Trump over his Twitter account

President Donald Trump uses a cell phone during a small business reopening panel discussion in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, the United States, on June 18, 2020.

Leah Millis | Reuters

The Supreme Court on Monday overturned a federal appeals court ruling that former President Donald Trump violated the Constitution by blocking his critics on Twitter.

The judges cleared up the decision of the 2nd US Court of Appeals and sent it back to the lower court with instructions to dismiss the case as “in dispute” or no longer active, as Trump is now a private individual. The lawsuit means that the decision of the lower court no longer binds future judges.

A three-judge panel of the 2nd Circle decided unanimously in 2019 that Trump was acting in his official capacity when he used the block function of Twitter. In this way, the court said, Trump effectively banned people from a public forum, which went against the first amendment.

The announcement on Monday was made in an order list and without a written explanation of the court’s arguments. No disagreements were found.

Judge Clarence Thomas unanimously wrote that he agreed to the decision to overturn the 2nd Circuit Opinion as Trump was no longer in office.

Thomas said the petition highlighted “the main legal difficulty surrounding digital platforms – namely that applying old teachings to new digital platforms is seldom easy”.

“For example, respondents indicate that some aspects of Mr. Trump’s account resemble a constitutionally protected public forum,” Thomas wrote. “But it seems pretty strange to say that something is a government forum when a private company has full authority to get rid of it.”

The lawsuit was filed by people who were blocked by Trump on Twitter and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

It was known as Trump v Knight First Amendment Institute, No. 20-197 until the change in administration, at which point the case automatically became known as Biden v Knight First Amendment Institute.

The Justice Department had originally asked the Supreme Court to overturn the 2nd Circle decision, but asked the judges to dismiss the case as in dispute on January 19, the day before President Joe Biden’s inauguration, because of the change in administration .

The Knight First Amendment Institute agreed that the case was contentious for another reason. The legal group said the case came up for discussion after Twitter kicked Trump off its platform in January following the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

In a statement, Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight Institute, said the case “is a very simple principle that is fundamental to our democracy: officials cannot exclude people from public forums just because they are with them disagree. “

“While we would have liked the Supreme Court to keep the Second Circle decision on the books, we are pleased that the Court of Appeal’s reasoning has already been adopted by other courts, and we are confident that they will how the public shapes them, will continue to shape them. ” Officials use social media, “said Jaffer.

Categories
Politics

Supreme Courtroom Vacates Ruling on Trump’s Twitter Exercise

Supreme Court Vacates Ruling on Trump's Twitter Activity

The Supreme Court on Monday overturned an appeals court ruling that President Donald J. Trump violated the first amendment by banning people from his Twitter account after posting critical comments.

A unanimous three-person jury from the appeals court ruled in 2019 that Mr Trump’s account was a public forum from which he could not exclude people based on their views.

The Supreme Court move was anticipated as Mr Trump is no longer President and Twitter has permanently banned his account.

More surprising was a 12-page consensus opinion from Justice Clarence Thomas, who pondered the dangerous power some private corporations have over freedom of expression.

“Today’s digital platforms offer opportunities for historically unprecedented amounts of speech, including speech from government actors,” he wrote. “But also unprecedented is the concentrated control over so much language in the hands of a few private parties. We will soon have no choice but to delve into applying our legal teachings to highly concentrated, privately owned information infrastructures such as digital platforms. “

No other judiciary followed suit, and Justice Thomas’ views on the First Amendment can be idiosyncratic. His opinion, however, reflected widespread frustration, particularly among conservatives, of letting private corporations decide what the public can read and see.

The Court of Appeal “feared that then President Trump would break off the speech by using the functions provided by Twitter,” wrote Justice Thomas. “But if the goal is to make sure the language isn’t stifled, the dominant digital platforms themselves must inevitably be the biggest concern.”

Categories
Business

Disinformation Listening to with Fb, Google and Twitter: Stay Updates

Laden des Videoplayers

Folgendes müssen Sie wissen:

Mark Zuckerberg von Facebook, Jack Dorsey von Twitter und Sundar Pichai von Google treten bei einer Anhörung auf darüber, wie sich Desinformation auf ihren Plattformen ausbreitet. Die Anhörung wird von zwei Unterausschüssen des größeren Energie- und Handelsausschusses des Hauses abgehalten, die sich mit Technologiefragen befassen.

VideoMark Zuckerberg von Facebook, Sundar Pichai von Google und Jack Dorsey von Twitter sagen vor dem Kongress aus der Ferne über “Fehlinformationen und Desinformation, die Online-Plattformen plagen” aus.AnerkennungAnerkennung…Poolfoto von Greg NashDie Capitol-Unruhen Anerkennung…Energie- und Handelsausschuss über YouTube

Demokratische Gesetzgeber beschuldigten die Geschäftsführer, Geld verdient zu haben, indem sie zuließen, dass Desinformation online grassierte, was ihre wachsende Frustration über die Verbreitung von Extremismus, Verschwörungstheorien und Unwahrheiten online nach dem Aufstand vom 6. Januar im Kapitol widerspiegelte.

Ihre Kommentare eröffneten die erste Anhörung seit der Amtseinführung von Präsident Biden mit Mark Zuckerberg von Facebook, Sundar Pichai von Google und Jack Dorsey von Twitter. Sie waren ein Signal dafür, dass die Überprüfung der Geschäftspraktiken im Silicon Valley mit den Demokraten im Weißen Haus und der Führung beider Kongresskammern nicht nachlassen und sich möglicherweise sogar intensivieren wird.

Der Gesetzgeber äußerte sich besorgt darüber, dass die Plattformen einen finanziellen Anreiz hatten, die Nutzer zu binden, indem sie ihnen brutale oder spaltende Inhalte zuführten, was die Verbreitung von Fehlinformationen, Verschwörungen und extremen Botschaften anheizte.

„Sie erwecken definitiv den Eindruck, dass Sie nicht glauben, dass Sie diese Fehlinformationen und diesen Extremismus in irgendeiner Weise aktiv fördern, und dem stimme ich überhaupt nicht zu. Sie sind keine passiven Zuschauer “, sagte der Vertreter Frank Pallone, der Demokrat aus New Jersey, der den Vorsitz im Energie- und Handelsausschuss führt. “Du verdienst Geld.”

Der Januar-Aufstand machte das Thema Desinformation für viele Gesetzgeber sehr persönlich. Einige Teilnehmer wurden mit Online-Verschwörungen wie QAnon in Verbindung gebracht, die die Plattformen in den letzten Monaten versucht haben einzudämmen.

Der Vertreter Mike Doyle, ein Demokrat aus Pennsylvania, drängte die Führungskräfte darauf, ob ihre Plattformen für die Verbreitung von Desinformationen im Zusammenhang mit dem Wahlergebnis 2020 verantwortlich seien, was den Aufruhr anheizte.

“Wie ist es möglich, dass Sie nicht zumindest zugeben, dass Facebook eine führende Rolle bei der Rekrutierung, Planung und Durchführung des Angriffs auf das Kapitol gespielt hat?” er fragte Herrn Zuckerberg.

“Ich denke, dass die Verantwortung hier bei den Menschen liegt, die Maßnahmen ergriffen haben, um das Gesetz zu brechen und den Aufstand zu führen”, sagte Zuckerberg und fügte hinzu, dass die Menschen, die die Fehlinformationen verbreiteten, ebenfalls Verantwortung trugen.

“Aber Ihre Plattformen haben das aufgeladen”, sagte Mr. Doyle.

Der Gesetzgeber argumentierte, dass die Plattformen auch Fehlinformationen über die Coronavirus-Pandemie ermöglicht hätten.

Die wachsende Frustration des Gesetzgebers kommt, wenn er überlegt, ob die Geschäftsmodelle der Plattformen strenger reguliert werden sollen. Einige haben vorgeschlagen, ein gesetzliches Schutzschild zu ändern, das Websites vor Rechtsstreitigkeiten über von ihren Benutzern veröffentlichte Inhalte schützt, und argumentiert, dass es den Unternehmen ermöglicht, bei der Überwachung ihrer Produkte fahrlässig davonzukommen.

Der Vertreter Jan Schakowsky, Demokrat von Illinois, sagte am Donnerstag, dass die Führungskräfte wegnehmen sollten, dass “die Selbstregulierung am Ende ihres Weges angelangt ist”.

Vertreter Bob Latta, Republikaner von Ohio, beschuldigte die Plattformen einer Anerkennung…Energie- und Handelsausschuss über YouTube

Republikanische Gesetzgeber kamen in die Anhörung, um über die Unruhen im Capitol am 6. Januar zu dämpfen, aber ihr Animus konzentrierte sich auf die Entscheidungen der Plattformen, rechte Persönlichkeiten, einschließlich des ehemaligen Präsidenten Donald J. Trump, wegen Anstiftung zu Gewalt zu verbieten.

Die Entscheidung, Herrn Trump, viele seiner Mitarbeiter und andere Konservative zu verbieten, sei eine liberale Voreingenommenheit und Zensur.

“Wir alle sind uns der zunehmenden Zensur konservativer Stimmen durch Big Tech und ihres Engagements für die radikale progressive Agenda bewusst”, sagte Bob Latta, der ranghöchste Republikaner des Unterausschusses für Kommunikation und Technologie des Hauses.

Nach den Unruhen im Capitol wurden Mr. Trump und einige seiner Top-Helfer vorübergehend oder auf unbestimmte Zeit auf wichtigen Social-Media-Websites verboten.

Es wird erwartet, dass die Kommentare von Herrn Latta von vielen Republikanern in der Anhörung wiederholt werden. Sie sagen, die Plattformen seien zu Gatekeepern von Informationen geworden, und sie beschuldigen die Unternehmen, konservative Ansichten zu unterdrücken. Die Behauptungen wurden von Wissenschaftlern konsequent widerlegt.

Herr Latta ging auf das gesetzliche Schutzschild ein, das als Section 230 des Communications Decency Act bekannt ist, und ob die großen Technologieunternehmen den behördlichen Schutz verdienen.

“Section 230 bietet Ihnen den Haftungsschutz für Entscheidungen zur Moderation von Inhalten, die nach Treu und Glauben getroffen wurden”, sagte Latta. Aber er sagte, die Unternehmen scheinen ihre Moderationsbefugnisse genutzt zu haben, um Standpunkte zu zensieren, mit denen die Unternehmen nicht einverstanden sind. “Ich finde das sehr besorgniserregend.”

Von den Geschäftsführern von Facebook, Alphabet und Twitter wird erwartet, dass sie auf beiden Seiten des Ganges vor schwierigen Fragen des Gesetzgebers stehen. Demokraten haben sich auf Desinformation konzentriert, insbesondere nach dem Aufstand im Kapitol. Die Republikaner haben die Unternehmen bereits nach ihren Entscheidungen befragt, konservative Persönlichkeiten und Geschichten von ihren Plattformen zu entfernen.

Reporter der New York Times haben viele der Beispiele behandelt, die auftauchen könnten. Hier sind die Fakten, die Sie über sie wissen sollten:

Nachdem sein Sohn 2016 in Israel von einem Mitglied der militanten Gruppe Hamas erstochen worden war, entschied Stuart Force, dass Facebook teilweise für den Tod verantwortlich war, da die Algorithmen, die das soziale Netzwerk antreiben, dazu beitrugen, den Inhalt der Hamas zu verbreiten. Er verklagte zusammen mit Verwandten anderer Terroropfer das Unternehmen und argumentierte, dass seine Algorithmen die Verbrechen unterstützten, indem sie regelmäßig Posten verstärkten, die zu Terroranschlägen ermutigten. Argumente über die Leistungsfähigkeit der Algorithmen haben in Washington nachhallt.

Section 230 des Communications Decency Act hat Facebook, YouTube, Twitter und unzähligen anderen Internetunternehmen zum Gedeihen verholfen. Der Haftungsschutz von Section 230 erstreckt sich jedoch auch auf Randwebsites, die für ihre Hassreden, antisemitischen Inhalte und rassistischen Tropen bekannt sind. Als die Prüfung großer Technologieunternehmen in Washington in Bezug auf eine Vielzahl von Themen, einschließlich des Umgangs mit der Verbreitung von Desinformation oder Hassreden der Polizei, intensiviert wurde, wurde Section 230 erneut in den Fokus gerückt.

Nachdem Facebook den politischen Diskurs rund um den Globus entflammt hat, versucht es, die Temperatur zu senken. Das soziale Netzwerk begann, seinen Algorithmus zu ändern, um den politischen Inhalt in den Newsfeeds der Benutzer zu reduzieren. Facebook gab eine Vorschau auf die Änderung Anfang dieses Jahres, als Mark Zuckerberg, der Geschäftsführer, sagte, das Unternehmen experimentiere mit Möglichkeiten, um spaltende politische Debatten unter den Nutzern einzudämmen. “Eines der wichtigsten Rückmeldungen, die wir derzeit von unserer Community hören, ist, dass die Menschen nicht wollen, dass Politik und Kämpfe ihre Erfahrungen mit unseren Diensten übernehmen”, sagte er.

Als das Wahlkollegium die Wahl von Joseph R. Biden Jr. bestätigte, ließen die Fehlinformationen über Wahlbetrug nach. Aber Händler von Online-Lügen haben Lügen über die Covid-19-Impfstoffe verbreitet. Die Republikanerin Marjorie Taylor Greene, eine Republikanerin aus Georgia, sowie rechtsextreme Websites wie ZeroHedge haben begonnen, falsche Impfstoffberichte zu veröffentlichen, sagten Forscher. Ihre Bemühungen wurden durch ein robustes Netzwerk von Anti-Impf-Aktivisten wie Robert F. Kennedy Jr. auf Plattformen wie Facebook, YouTube und Twitter verstärkt.

Am Ende taten zwei Milliardäre aus Kalifornien das, was Legionen von Politikern, Staatsanwälten und Maklern jahrelang versucht hatten und versäumten: Sie zogen Präsident Trump den Stecker. Journalisten und Historiker werden Jahre damit verbringen, den improvisatorischen Charakter der Verbote auszupacken und zu untersuchen, warum sie angekommen sind, als Herr Trump seine Macht verlor und die Demokraten bereit waren, die Kontrolle über den Kongress und das Weiße Haus zu übernehmen. Die Verbote haben auch eine seit Jahren schwelende Debatte um freie Meinungsäußerung angeheizt.

Geschäftsführer von Google, Apple, Amazon und Facebook sagen im Juli aus. Mark Zuckerberg von Facebook hat sechs Mal auf dem Capitol Hill ausgesagt.Anerkennung…Poolfoto von Mandel Ngan

Im Herbst 2017, als der Kongress Google, Facebook und Twitter aufforderte, über ihre Rolle bei der Einmischung Russlands in die Präsidentschaftswahlen 2016 auszusagen, schickten die Unternehmen ihre Geschäftsführer nicht – wie vom Gesetzgeber gefordert – und riefen stattdessen ihre Anwälte dazu auf Stelle dich dem Feuer.

Während der Anhörungen beschwerten sich die Politiker darüber, dass die General Counsel Fragen dazu beantworteten, ob die Unternehmen dazu beigetragen hätten, den demokratischen Prozess zu untergraben, anstatt “die Top-Leute, die tatsächlich die Entscheidungen treffen”, wie Senator Angus King, ein unabhängiger von Maine, es ausdrückte .

Es war klar, dass Capitol Hill sein Pfund CEO-Fleisch haben wollte und dass es nicht lange funktionieren würde, sich hinter den Anwälten zu verstecken. Diese anfängliche Besorgnis darüber, wie die Häuptlinge des Silicon Valley mit dem Grillen von Gesetzgebern umgehen würden, ist keine Sorge mehr. Nach einer Reihe von virtuellen und persönlichen Anhörungen in den letzten Jahren hatten die Führungskräfte viel Übung.

Seit 2018 hat Sundar Pichai, der Geschäftsführer von Google, drei Mal ausgesagt. Jack Dorsey, der Geschäftsführer von Twitter, hat vier Auftritte absolviert, und Mark Zuckerberg, der Chef von Facebook, hat sechs Mal ausgesagt.

Und wenn die drei Männer am Donnerstag erneut befragt werden, werden sie dies jetzt als erfahrene Veteranen tun, um die bösartigsten Angriffe abzulenken und dann zu ihren sorgfältig geübten Gesprächsthemen umzuleiten.

Im Allgemeinen neigt Herr Pichai dazu, bei den schärfsten Stößen des Gesetzgebers höflich und schnell anderer Meinung zu sein – beispielsweise als Herr Pichai letztes Jahr gefragt wurde, warum Google Inhalte von ehrlichen Unternehmen stiehlt -, aber keine Harfe darauf. Wenn ein Politiker versucht, ihn auf ein bestimmtes Thema festzulegen, stützt er sich häufig auf eine bekannte Verzögerungstaktik: Meine Mitarbeiter werden sich bei Ihnen melden.

Herr Pichai ist kein dynamischer Technologieführer mit Personenkult wie Steve Jobs oder Elon Musk, aber sein zurückhaltendes Auftreten und seine Ernsthaftigkeit eignen sich gut für das Rampenlicht des Kongresses.

Herr Zuckerberg hat sich im Laufe der Zeit auch mit den Anhörungen wohler gefühlt und betont, was das Unternehmen zur Bekämpfung von Fehlinformationen unternimmt. Bei seinem ersten Auftritt im Jahr 2018 war Herr Zuckerberg zerknirscht und versprach, es besser zu machen, wenn er die Benutzerdaten nicht schützt und russische Einmischung in Wahlen verhindert.

Seitdem hat er die Botschaft verbreitet, dass Facebook eine Plattform für immer ist, und dabei sorgfältig die Schritte dargelegt, die das Unternehmen unternimmt, um Desinformation online auszumerzen.

Da die Sitzungen während der Pandemie virtuell verlaufen sind, haben Mr. Dorseys Auftritte, die sich über eine Laptop-Kamera gebeugt haben, im Vergleich zu den schwach beleuchteten neutralen Kulissen für die Google- und Facebook-Chefs einen ganz anderen Zoom-Charakter.

Herr Dorsey neigt dazu, extrem ruhig zu bleiben – fast zenartig -, wenn er mit aggressiven Fragen gedrängt wird, und beschäftigt sich häufig mit technischen Fragen, die selten ein Follow-up verbieten.

VideoCinemagraphAnerkennungAnerkennung…Von Sean Dong

Im heutigen On Tech-Newsletter erklärt Shira Ovide, dass die Debatte in Abschnitt 230 unser Unbehagen über die Macht von Big Tech und unseren Wunsch widerspiegelt, jemanden zur Rechenschaft zu ziehen.

Categories
World News

Russia slows down Twitter to guard residents from unlawful content material

Russia slows down Twitter to protect citizens from illegal content

Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Alexei Nikolsky | Reuters

Russia has announced that it will impose restrictions on the social media platform Twitter for not removing illegal content from its platform.

The Federal Service for Communications, Information Technology and Mass Communication, also known as Roskomnadzor, announced on Wednesday that it was slowing the speed of Twitter.

The communications guard said he was taking measures to ensure the safety of Russian citizens and could completely block the service if Twitter does not respond appropriately.

Twitter did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

According to Roskomnadzor, speeds will be reduced on all mobile devices and 50% of all non-mobile devices such as computers, it said in a statement on its website.

Roskomnadzor accused Twitter of not removing content that encourages minors to commit suicide, as well as child pornography and drug use.

The regulator asked Twitter to remove links and posts more than 28,000 times between 2017 and March 2021. Other social networks have been more cooperative than Twitter to remove content that encourages minors to commit suicide.

Russia’s move to curb Twitter follows similar actions by governments in Turkey and India, which have also threatened jail sentences for platform managers.

Matt Navara, a social media advisor, told CNBC that the “threat of restricting, blocking, or banning social media platforms appears to be a growing trend for countries notorious for tougher, less democratic regimes” .

Social media platforms are in a constant battle to keep inappropriate content off their platforms. Facebook, TikTok, YouTube, and Twitter all use a combination of software and human content moderators to monitor what’s being shared on their platforms, but none of them have really mastered content moderation.

One of the most notorious examples of recent times was the Christchurch shooter who broadcast his mass murder live on Facebook and other platforms. The video was quickly cloned and re-shared by other users, faster than the content moderators could remove, and it remained on Facebook for a few weeks after the attack.

Categories
Business

Fb, Google and Twitter C.E.O.s to Face Lawmakers Once more: Dwell Updates

Jack Dorsey, left, the chief executive of Twitter; Sundar Pichai, the chief executive of Google; and Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Facebook, will appear before the House Energy and Commerce Committee on March 25.

Here’s what you need to know:

Credit…Lm Otero Jose Luis Magana/Associated Press

The chief executives of Facebook, Google and Twitter will face skeptical lawmakers again next month when a congressional committee questions them about the ways disinformation spreads across their platforms.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee said Thursday that it would hold a hearing on March 25 with Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, Sundar Pichai of Google and Jack Dorsey of Twitter.

The committee has been examining the future of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law that shields the platforms from lawsuits over much of the content posted by their users. The attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, which included participants with ties to QAnon and other conspiracy theories that have spread widely online, has renewed concerns that the law allows the platforms to take a hands-off approach to extremist content.

“For far too long, Big Tech has failed to acknowledge the role they’ve played in fomenting and elevating blatantly false information to its online audiences,” a group of the committee’s top Democrats said in a statement. “Industry self-regulation has failed.”

Andy Stone, a spokesman for Facebook, said the company “believes it’s time to update the rules of the internet, and this hearing should be another important step in the process.”

The House Judiciary Committee announced its own set of hearings on the tech industry on Thursday. It said it would hold multiple hearings on how to update antitrust laws to address the power of the tech giants. The committee questioned chief executives before concluding a lengthy investigation into the companies last year.

The Judiciary Committee’s first hearing will take place on Wednesday.

An all-electric Renault Zoe. Renault’s chief executive, Luca de Meo, last month presented a plan to return the automaker to profitability.Credit…Samuel Zeller for The New York Times

Renault, the French carmaker, reported a loss of 8 billion euros, or $9.7 billion, in 2020 as the pandemic gutted sales, but the company said that was profitable in the later part of the year.

Most of the annual loss stemmed from Renault’s stake in its troubled partner, Nissan. Losses at the Japanese carmaker drained €5 billion from the bottom line, Renault said. In addition, Renault car sales plunged 20 percent for the year, to just short of three million vehicles.

“After a first half impacted by Covid-19, the group has significantly turned around its performance in the second half,” Luca de Meo, Renault’s chief executive, said in a statement, without giving a figure. He said that 2021 was “set to be difficult given the unknowns regarding the health crisis as well as electronic components supply shortages.”

In 2021, shortages of semiconductors, a problem for almost all carmakers, could cut production by as much as 100,000 vehicles, Renault said.

Mr. de Meo, who became Renault’s chief executive in July, last month announced a plan to return to profitability that includes cuts in production capacity, sales of fewer models and increased parts sharing among vehicles to simplify manufacturing.

A tractor trailer is stuck in the ice and snow in Killeen, Texas. The winter storms that wreaked havoc across the South and Midwest have affected futures for oil and natural gas prices.Credit…Joe Raedle/Getty Images

  • Oil futures are trending downward after jumping earlier in the week, while natural gas gyrated through the day. Both were affected by the fierce winter storms that caused millions of people to go without power across Texas this week.

  • West Texas Intermediate, the U.S. benchmark crude, was down 2 percent on Friday, to about $59.35 a barrel. It had jumped 6 percent between Friday and Wednesday, as oil production was hindered by the weather.

  • Natural gas futures, which rose as a result of the storms, have moved up and down in recent days. On Friday they initially fell 3 percent before rebounding and eventually gaining nearly 1 percent from Thursday’s close. They still remain elevated from last week.

  • Word that the Biden administration was offering to restart talks to restore an accord limiting Iran’s nuclear program was seen as weighing on oil prices. Lifting sanctions against Iran could allow it sell more oil on the global market. Brent crude, the international benchmark, was down 1.2 percent on Friday, to just over $63 a barrel.

  • Wall Street had an upbeat start of trading on Friday. The S&P 500 rose 0.2 percent after falling 0.4 percent on Thursday, halting four consecutive days of gains.

  • Shares of Uber rose 0.5 percent after Britain’s Supreme Court ruled that the company’s drivers must be classified as workers entitled to a minimum wage and vacation time. The case had been closely watched because of its ramifications for the gig economy.

  • European markets were broadly higher, with the Stoxx Europe 600 up 0.5 percent and FTSE 100 in Britain gaining 0.2 percent. Asian markets closed mixed, with the Nikkei in Japan down 0.7 percent while the Shanghai composite in China rose 0.6 percent.

  • Purchasing managers index data for February, from Markit, showed a range of trends across Europe. The France composite output index hit a three-month low, reflecting the restrictions on business activity imposed by the latest lockdown. The Germany composite index rose, helped by an export-led manufacturing upturn.

  • In Britain, retail sales fell 8.2 percent in January compared with the preceding month, government data said, a downturn that was sharpened by a lockdown that started in the new year. But the decline was less than expected, and also not as bad as the 22 percent drop seen in April, when Britain went into an earlier lockdown. The Office of National Statistics said some of the improvement probably came from businesses learning to adapt to lockdowns, with more online and click-and-collect sales.

Manessa Grady and her sons Zechariah, 8, left, and Noah, 9, were among the millions of Texas residents who lost power this week.Credit…Tamir Kalifa for The New York Times

In California, wildfires and heat waves in recent years forced utilities to shut off power to millions of homes and businesses. Now, Texas is learning that deadly winter storms and intense cold can do the same.

Bill Magness, the president and chief executive of the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the state’s grid operator, said on Thursday that Texas was “seconds and minutes” from a catastrophic blackout this week as rotating outages were used to control the flow of electricity.

The country’s two largest states have taken very different approaches to managing their energy needs — Texas deregulated aggressively, letting the free market flourish, while California embraced environmental regulations. Yet the two states are confronting the same ominous reality: They may be woefully unprepared for the increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters caused by climate change.

Blackouts in Texas and California have revealed that power plants can be strained and knocked offline by the kind of extreme cold and hot weather that climate scientists have said will become more common as greenhouse gases build up in the atmosphere.

The problems in Texas and California highlight the challenge the Biden administration will face in modernizing the electricity system to run entirely on wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and other zero-emission technologies by 2035 — a goal that President Biden set during the 2020 campaign.

The federal government and energy businesses may have to spend trillions of dollars to harden electricity grids against the threat posed by climate change and to move away from the fossil fuels responsible for the warming of the planet in the first place. These are not new ideas. Scholars have long warned that American electricity grids, which are run regionally, will come under increasing strain and needed major upgrades.

“We really need to change our paradigm, particularly utilities, because they are becoming much more vulnerable to disaster,” Najmedin Meshkati, an engineering professor at the University of Southern California, said about blackouts in Texas and California. “They need to always think about literally the worst-case scenario because the worst-case scenario is going to happen.”

Video

transcript

Back

transcript

Congressman Calls Robinhood’s Help Line and Gets Voicemail

After telling the House Financial Services Committee about the suicide of Robinhood user Alex Kearns, who died believing he had lost $730,000 on the brokerage app, Representative Sean Casten called its help line.

June 2020, Alex Kearns, who was 20 years old at the time, from Naperville, Illinois, killed himself, largely thanks to a bug in the Robinhood system. The bug was that he turned on the app, it said he owed $730,000 that he did not have, because of options positions that he thought canceled out but didn’t appear to. He called the help line. The help line, of course, was not manned, as we’ve discussed. He sent several panicked emails — three, to be precise — did not receive a response. Ultimately there was a response from the emails saying that, in fact, his positions were covered. But by that point, it was too late, because he had taken his own life. The — this is a gentleman who is 20 years old. Under Illinois law, he was not allowed to buy a beer, but he was allowed to take on $730,000 in positions and exposure that he did not have the liquidity to cover. Your mission, Mr. Tenev, is to democratize finance. But the history of financial regulation is to protect people like Alex Kearns from the system. As the old joke goes, if you’re playing poker and you can’t figure out who the fish is at the table, you should leave the table because you’re probably the fish. And there is an innate tension in your business model between democratizing finance, which is a noble calling, and being a conduit to feed fish to sharks. So I’m nervous. I think I got an exposure. And I call your help line now. Let’s call and let’s listen in the time we have remaining to what I’m going to hear on the other end of the phone. Voicemail: “Thank you for calling Robinhood. Please visit us at robinhood.com or on our app for support. If you have an urgent trading need, please make sure to include details of it when reaching out. Thanks have a great day.”

Video player loadingAfter telling the House Financial Services Committee about the suicide of Robinhood user Alex Kearns, who died believing he had lost $730,000 on the brokerage app, Representative Sean Casten called its help line.CreditCredit…via C-Span

The chief executives of Robinhood, Reddit, Citadel and Melvin Capital Management were among the witnesses at a hearing on the GameStop trading frenzy held by the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday.

  • Vlad Tenev, the chief executive of Robinhood, was the target for both Democrats and Republicans, fielding more than half of the lawmakers’ questions. “I love your company because it does, when correctly managed, provide investment opportunities for individuals who are currently frozen out of the markets for one reason or another,” said Representative Anthony Gonzalez, Republican of Ohio. He added: “At the same time, though, I believe a vulnerability was clearly exposed in your business model.”

  • Representative Sean Casten, an Illinois Democrat, capped his sharp questioning of Mr. Tenev, in which he relayed the story of a 20-year-old college student who killed himself last summer believing that he’d lost more than $700,000, by dialing the Robinhood help line and letting everyone listen in as a short message was played and the call was terminated. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Democrat of New York, said Robinhood’s decisions had “harmed customers,” and accused it of passing on hidden costs to its customers.

  • Keith Gill — known on YouTube as Roaring Kitty — testified that his interest in the company was based on his belief that the market was underestimating the brick-and-mortar retailer’s value. His testimony included winking references — such as dangling what appeared to be his oft-worn red headband off a picture of a kitten visible over his shoulder and the statement “I am not a cat” — to internet meme culture.

  • Several harsh questions were directed at Kenneth C. Griffin, the chief of Citadel. Members of Congress asked skeptical questions about Citadel’s practice of paying to trade against customers at online brokers like Robinhood. Mr. Griffin tried to explain the intricacies of the business but was often cut off. “Our folks are tired of bailing you all out when you screw up and gamble with the retirement fund. And that’s exactly what happens every single moment,” Representative Rashida Tlaib, Democrat of Michigan, said to him.

Categories
Business

Level72 founder Steve Cohen leaves Twitter after household receives threats

Point72 founder Steve Cohen leaves Twitter after family receives threats

Steven A. Cohen

Scott Eells | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Steve Cohen, the founder of Point72 hedge fund and owner of the New York Mets, turned off his Twitter account after his family received threats in the GameStop trading frenzy this week.

“I really enjoyed the back and forth with Mets fans on Twitter, which was unfortunately overtaken this week by misinformation unrelated to the Mets that resulted in our family receiving personal threats,” Cohen said in a statement on Saturday.

“So I’m taking a break for the time being. We have other options to listen to your suggestions and keep advocating,” he said.

Cohen’s hedge fund, which manages nearly $ 19 billion in assets, lost nearly 15% this year after small investors drove shares of video game retailer GameStop, a source familiar with the matter told the New York Times.

The losses at Point72 are mainly due to the company’s investment in the hedge fund Melvin Capital, which bet against GameStop and had to receive emergency money of nearly $ 3 billion from two outside investors, including Point72.

Cohen, who bought the Mets for about $ 2.5 billion in November, was faced with questions on Twitter about how Melvin’s losses would affect the baseball team.

Cohen also had a back-and-forth with Barstool Sports founder Dave Portnoy on Twitter Thursday after Portnoy accused Cohen of being involved in controversial trade restrictions in GameStop for apps like Robinhood.

Categories
Politics

Trump backer held on pipe bomb costs, mentioned attacking Twitter, Fb

Trump backer held on pipe bomb charges, discussed attacking Twitter, Facebook

Ian Benjamin Rogers

Source: Napa County Sheriff’s Office

A California man charged with possession of five pipe bombs spoke of targeting Democrats and social media giants Twitter and Facebook as part of a discussion of the “war” to ensure that former President Donald Trump would stays in the White House.

“I want to blow up a Democratic building that is that bad,” Napa County’s man Ian Benjamin Rogers wrote in a text message on a criminal complaint in the California Federal District Court. The complaint described a wide range of firearms, ammunition, bomb-making equipment and warfare manuals that were in his possession.

“The Democrats have to pay,” wrote Rogers, a married father of two who owns British Auto Repair from the Napa Valley.

In another text message, Rogers said he was “thinking of the first target of the Sac Office,” which an FBI agent suspects is the Sacramento office of California Governor Gavin Newsom.

“Then maybe bird and face offices,” wrote the 44-year-old according to the complaint.

“Sorry it came to that, but I’m not going down without a fight … These commies need to be told what’s going on.”

The agent said the text appears to refer to Twitter, whose logo is a blue bird, and Facebook “because both social media platforms blocked Trump’s accounts to prevent him from sending messages on those platforms,” ​​briefly After the January 6 uprising, the US Capitol was loved by a crowd of its supporters.

Rogers wrote in another text in which Trump was apparently the 45th president: “I hope 45 goes to war, if he doesn’t I will.”

Rogers admitted during an interview with FBI agents that “he built the pipe bombs but said they were for entertainment purposes only,” the complaint read.

However, the complaint states that these and other text messages indicated that Rogers mistakenly believed Trump won the 2020 presidential election and “his intention to attack Democrats and Democrat-affiliated venues to ensure Trump stays in office”.

“I continue to believe that the messages express Rogers’ intention to commit acts of violence locally in the absence of an organized ‘war’ to prevent Joe Biden from assuming the presidency,” the FBI agent wrote.

The agent noted that Rogers wrote in a January 10 text message, “We can attack Twitter or the Democrats you choose … I think we can either attack easily.”

When the person he texted suggested, “Let’s go after Soros” – well-known liberal investor George Soros – Rogers replied that Twitter or Democrats would be “easy” now while “Soros” had a “road trip” would require. “said the complaint.

Rogers, who is being held on $ 5 million federal gun charges, has yet to appear in federal court in San Francisco to be charged with unlawful possession of an unregistered destructive device.

Rogers’ attorney, Jess Raphael, said that a “disgruntled former employee” who had been fired by Rogers initiated the criminal investigation.

“The tipster had sent a handwritten document to the FBI in September that they were investigating and decided it was unrelated to terrorism and decided not to bring charges,” Raphael said in an email to CNBC.

“Apparently dissatisfied, the tipster sent a copy of his letter to the Napa sheriffs in October, who opened an investigation,” said the lawyer. “Nothing was done about it until January 15th after the Capitol Rebellion. I don’t know why they haven’t done anything for months.”

Raphael called Rodgers a “family man and a valued parishioner”. The lawyer also said, “I have 36 letters confirming his non-violence character.”

“He was a strong believer in President Trump and a gun collector,” said Raphael.

One person who answered the phone in Rogers’ workshop declined to comment, saying, “A lawyer advised us not to speak to reporters.”

The federal criminal complaint stated that the Napa County Sheriff’s Office, the FBI, and the Napa Special Investigations Bureau found a large gun safe in his shop containing several guns and the five during the January 15 raids on Rogers’ home and business Contained pipe bombs.

Pipe bombs as shown in an FBI criminal complaint

Source: FBI

Other items found in the safe were materials used to create destructive devices, including gunpowder, pipes and end caps.

Authorities also found manuals such as The Anarchist Cookbook, US Army Improvised Munitions Handbook, Homemade C-4: A Recipe for Survival, US Army Special Forces Guide to Unconventional Warfare, and the Guerrilla Warfare Handbook the Army.

A Nazi flag was also found in his safe, according to a prosecutor.

In total, the authorities confiscated 49 firearms from his home and business, including around two dozen ammunition boxes with thousands of rounds of ammunition.

One of the firearms is “an apparently kit-built MG-42 belt-drive machine gun that can fire fully automatically,” says the complaint.

The MG-42 during World War II was made in Germany and used by Nazi forces.

According to the criminal complaint, a sticker on a Rogers vehicle has a symbol for the anti-government group of three percent.

Rogers is not being charged in connection with the attack on the Capitol by the thousands of Trump supporters who made violent but botched efforts to get Congress to reject Joe Biden’s election as president. Five people died in connection with the riot, including a Capitol policeman who was beaten by people in the crowd.

The FBI continues to search for people who left two pipe bombs outside the national headquarters of the Republican and Democratic National Committees on the same day as this riot.

Raphael, Rogers’ attorney, said in his email that “the so-called tube bombs were little tubes filled with gunpowder to fill bullets that were capped, which is all normal hardware store.”

“They were detonated by the sheriffs in tires stacked outside Mr. Rogers’ auto repair shop,” said Raphael. “They didn’t even seem to damage the tires, as I saw in the newspaper photos. His entire weapon collection and the so-called pipe bombs were kept in a large, thick metal weapon safe.”

The attorney also said that even the tipster who briefed law enforcement on Rogers said he “told the sheriff’s investigators that Mr. Rogers was not a militia, hate group or extremist.”

Raphael also said he believed the Napa Sheriffs Department had apparently abused the bail process by filing a motion to significantly increase Rogers’ bond, alleging that he was likely to flee the jurisdiction.

“The entirety of their statement concerned weapons and language, none of which had anything to do with threatened escape,” said the lawyer.

A Twitter spokesman declined to comment.

Facebook did not have an immediate comment.