The quality of images from the vast majority of security cameras is so low I don't see how they can get any sort of match confidence. Also there have been plenty of reports about how the various systems get the wrong face on minorities, and New Orleans is 60% black or African-American.
Oh I'm not arguing that the parents didn't have a responsibility to be doing the parental oversight thing. I'm just asking if tiktoc can get dinged for letting a 10 year old on in the first place cause that law I mentioned in the first post says child accounts have to be treated differently and with more "safeguards "
Could they go after tiktoc for violating COPPA or whatever that online child protection law is? If this 10 year old was signing up for tiktoc then they should have known she was 10 and tailored the feed to her age. If she created an account and lied about her age, how were they to know?
And here I thought Qualified Immunity was for those instances law enforcement had to act with only a moments notice because to do other wise would have the situation end badly in some way. Did Ms. Lind have to rapidly and with little time to spare about the legality of what she was doing log into the account, do a password change request and search the Dropbox before the other guy could finish hitting delete?
As an avid player of Destiny 2 I thought I would update everyone on this. Turns out it was an imposter using an email address that looked similar to the company they use to find infringement. Bungie does not allow automated take downs, if it comes down it is because someone at Bungie pulled the trigger. They worked with Google to get the imposter account banned and all accounts that had action taken against them have been or are in the process of being restored.
More details can be found in Bungies weekly newsletter to their players.
https://www.bungie.net/en/Explore/Detail/News/51193
I do believe the "contract" you agree to boils down to "You can say what you want, but these are our servers and if we don't like what you say we can and will remove your privilege of using them."
Please remeber that, Meta is giving you the privilege of using their service to exercise your right to free speech. There is noting in there that says they can't take away that privilege.
Was that a contract or a typical click through Terms of Service? Cause as we have seen other branches of the government show, Terms of Service are more like suggestions (police and federal agents making fake accounts for law enforcement activities).
I'm pretty sure this would meet the malicious intent hurdles of a slander/libel case against the governor. The governor was told by multiple sources that the information he was speaking was incorrect, yet kept on doing it.
This almost sounds like the old FIOA boss knew they were on their way out and sent along the extra documents as a way to tweak the nose of whoever took their place. Or maybe knew that the extra info could turn whatever case the law firm was working on in their favor.
If they don't put actual security on their hardware and software, they just leave the system open to me coming in behind them and turning those features on and then disconnecting the phone home verification.
Here is what I do. All the robocalls are done with automated dialers that work from list of numbers and those lists get passed around and sold.
When a call comes in that your caller ID says could possibly be a spammer or you don't recognize the number, pick up. As soon as you pick up hit the mute button. What usually happens is that the automated message that starts up is listening for someone to say something on the other end, then it goes into its speech. If you mute your mic right away the machine listening on the other end assumes it is a dead line and hangs up after 10 seconds.
If there is in fact a real person on the other end they will usually pipe up and say something after it stops ringing and they get an empty line. You can then unmute and see who the hell is calling you over just sending a text message.
Why not both?
The quality of images from the vast majority of security cameras is so low I don't see how they can get any sort of match confidence. Also there have been plenty of reports about how the various systems get the wrong face on minorities, and New Orleans is 60% black or African-American.
Oh I'm not arguing that the parents didn't have a responsibility to be doing the parental oversight thing. I'm just asking if tiktoc can get dinged for letting a 10 year old on in the first place cause that law I mentioned in the first post says child accounts have to be treated differently and with more "safeguards "
Could they go after tiktoc for violating COPPA or whatever that online child protection law is? If this 10 year old was signing up for tiktoc then they should have known she was 10 and tailored the feed to her age. If she created an account and lied about her age, how were they to know?
And here I thought Qualified Immunity was for those instances law enforcement had to act with only a moments notice because to do other wise would have the situation end badly in some way. Did Ms. Lind have to rapidly and with little time to spare about the legality of what she was doing log into the account, do a password change request and search the Dropbox before the other guy could finish hitting delete?
Don't think they can run those on a live stream when it would be most impactful or not allow the officials to clamp down on the accounts.
I think a better cheeky reply would be to simply quote nothing but the text of the 1st ammendment.
Are regulations really so toothless that Comcast can't be sued for false advertisment?
As an avid player of Destiny 2 I thought I would update everyone on this. Turns out it was an imposter using an email address that looked similar to the company they use to find infringement. Bungie does not allow automated take downs, if it comes down it is because someone at Bungie pulled the trigger. They worked with Google to get the imposter account banned and all accounts that had action taken against them have been or are in the process of being restored. More details can be found in Bungies weekly newsletter to their players. https://www.bungie.net/en/Explore/Detail/News/51193
I do believe the "contract" you agree to boils down to "You can say what you want, but these are our servers and if we don't like what you say we can and will remove your privilege of using them." Please remeber that, Meta is giving you the privilege of using their service to exercise your right to free speech. There is noting in there that says they can't take away that privilege.
Was that a contract or a typical click through Terms of Service? Cause as we have seen other branches of the government show, Terms of Service are more like suggestions (police and federal agents making fake accounts for law enforcement activities).
I'm pretty sure this would meet the malicious intent hurdles of a slander/libel case against the governor. The governor was told by multiple sources that the information he was speaking was incorrect, yet kept on doing it.
This almost sounds like the old FIOA boss knew they were on their way out and sent along the extra documents as a way to tweak the nose of whoever took their place. Or maybe knew that the extra info could turn whatever case the law firm was working on in their favor.
I fully expect, after this passes because I'm much to cynical to believe it won't, someone to get sued for using HTTPS encryption and then losing.
Re: The less charitable read....
If they don't put actual security on their hardware and software, they just leave the system open to me coming in behind them and turning those features on and then disconnecting the phone home verification.
Respectfully I would have to strongly disagree with this statement. The persons family and loved ones are also victims of the event.
I was very amused that they feel insulted by the name "Big Broadband" and feel it is a pejorative. Absolutely nothing like their label of "Big Tech".
Here is what I do. All the robocalls are done with automated dialers that work from list of numbers and those lists get passed around and sold.
When a call comes in that your caller ID says could possibly be a spammer or you don't recognize the number, pick up. As soon as you pick up hit the mute button. What usually happens is that the automated message that starts up is listening for someone to say something on the other end, then it goes into its speech. If you mute your mic right away the machine listening on the other end assumes it is a dead line and hangs up after 10 seconds.
If there is in fact a real person on the other end they will usually pipe up and say something after it stops ringing and they get an empty line. You can then unmute and see who the hell is calling you over just sending a text message.
Might do ok though it would be titled something like "Instant Karma for Dumb Bully" I'd wager.
SPEECH Act?
Does the SPEECH act only apply to individuals or does Twitter have to lose and then claim immunity to fines and fees under the SPEECH Act?