TWITTER CAUGHT SELLING DATA TO GOVERNMENT SPIES WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT SURVEILLANCE

[GMDino]

https://futurism.com/the-byte/twitter-selling-data-government

Quote:Double Dealing

The social network formerly known as Twitter and now called X has for the better part of the past decade been involved in a lawsuit suing the US government for greater transparency on its surveillance practices on the platform.


The lawsuit continued under Elon Musk after he took over in 2022. When the Supreme Court eventually struck down the suit in January, Musk wrote that it was "disappointing."

But now, newly obtained emails have left both X and Musk, who has long claimed to be a champion of free speech, with egg on their faces. The Intercept reports that despite railing against state spying, the social media company has been quietly profiting off it this entire time — selling a "firehose" of user data for the explicit purpose of being used by law enforcement.


Buddy-Buddy
According to the report, the data is sold to the surveillance firm Dataminr, which uses AI technology to constantly monitor public activity on social media and other parts of the web.


In doing so, its clients, often law enforcement, can receive customized real-time alerts on what's brewing online, which helps them respond to natural disasters or — much more ominously — spy on protests, notes The Intercept.


In emails between Dataminr and the US Secret Service it obtained with a Freedom of Information Act request, the story revealed that the surveillance firm pays for special access to a "firehose" of data from Twitter. Sent in July 2023, they also confirm that practice continued under Musk.


"Dataminr has a unique contractual relationship with Twitter, whereby we have real-time access to the full stream of all publicly available Tweets," a company representative said in an email to the government agency, per the report.

In another email, the Secret Service confirmed the nature of the relationship: "the whole point of this contract is to use the information for law enforcement purposes," it read.


Two Faced
Besides contradicting the values of the lawsuit, the practice also goes against Twitter's own policies, notes The Intercept, which prohibit "conducting or providing surveillance or gathering intelligence."


But there's a thin technicality: the data isn't going directly to the government, but is rather being leased to an intermediary data firm, which in turn leases the data via real-time alerts to government agencies.


"While I appreciate that there may be some symbolic difference between giving the government granular data directly and making them sift through what they buy from data brokers, the end result is still that user data ends up in the hands of law enforcement, and this time without any legal process," David Greene, civil liberties director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told The Intercept.


To be clear, this is a practice that began long before Musk took over, and Twitter certainly isn't the only platform happy to pawn off your privacy to the feds. But on the other hand, this is the exact kind of two-facedness that Musk has long displayed.

[SunsetBengal]

Is it just the company formerly known as Twitter, or do they all do the same?

[GMDino]

(03-31-2024, 03:58 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Is it just the company formerly known as Twitter, or do they all do the same?

It's like you just don't read the articles.  At all.  

I wonder why? 

[SunsetBengal]

(03-31-2024, 04:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: It's like you just don't read the articles.  At all.  

I wonder why? 

Quote:To be clear, this is a practice that began long before Musk took over, and Twitter certainly isn't the only platform happy to pawn off your privacy to the feds. But on the other hand, this is the exact kind of two-facedness that Musk has long displayed.

I read the damn article, was just wondering why you picked this one, when the article clearly states that others are happy to sell our info to the feds. Seems like whomever wrote this article is willing to dismiss other tech firms doing similar, because of virtue signaling or some shat.

[GMDino]

(03-31-2024, 04:09 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I read the damn article, was just wondering why you picked this one, when the article clearly states that others are happy to sell our info to the feds. Seems like whomever wrote this article is willing to dismiss other tech firms doing similar, because of virtue signaling or some shat.

If you read it, and since you quoted it the 2nd time I guess you did, you knew others did it too...so why as the "damn" question?

The article is about Musk being a hypocrite.  You can discuss that or you can share articles of other sites that do the same.

[Mike M (the other one)]

Ban Tik-Tok... bastids

[SunsetBengal]

(03-31-2024, 04:12 PM)GMDino Wrote: If you read it, and since you quoted it the 2nd time I guess you did, you knew others did it too...so why as the "damn" question?

The article is about Musk being a hypocrite.  You can discuss that or you can share articles of other sites that do the same.

Actually seems that the author of the article only wants to point out Musk, when all of the major Tech Companies do similar. That seems more hypocritical than the hypocrisy of Musk doing the same as others. Why is it only important that he did it, and the focus of the article not on all companies that do it?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-31-2024, 05:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Actually seems that the author of the article only wants to point out Musk, when all of the major Tech Companies do similar. That seems more hypocritical than the hypocrisy of Musk doing the same as others. Why is it only important that he did it, and the focus of the article not on all companies that do it?

My guess is Tik-Tok won't sell their info to the fed? hence Ban the effers. 
But I agree, FB likely does it as well.

[Luvnit2]

Your own source acknowledges all the social media companies do it. Nice try, this is a nothing burger.

To be clear, this is a practice that began long before Musk took over, and Twitter certainly isn't the only platform happy to pawn off your privacy to the feds


I love the way they hide this sentence until the very end of the article versus stating it upfront.

[Luvnit2]

(03-31-2024, 05:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Actually seems that the author of the article only wants to point out Musk, when all of the major Tech Companies do similar. That seems more hypocritical than the hypocrisy of Musk doing the same as others. Why is it only important that he did it, and the focus of the article not on all companies that do it?

Simple, the Democrats, fake news and the US government do not control "X", but they do control everything else including the Google search engine, Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. 

[GMDino]

Story is about Twitter/X and the lawsuit involving them.

The article doesn't mention the wall or immigration or Covid either because it is about one specific thing.

Bunch of people here wanna "others do it to" to an article that say just that but is specifically about Musk and Twitter because of the lawsuit.

Then argue about it.

What a world.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(03-31-2024, 10:24 PM)GMDino Wrote: Story is about Twitter/X and the lawsuit involving them.

The article doesn't mention the wall or immigration or Covid either because it is about one specific thing.

Bunch of people here wanna "others do it to" to an article that say just that but is specifically about Musk and Twitter because of the lawsuit.

Then argue about it.

What a world.

you posted the Article, with no comments or thoughts of your own to steer the conversation and left everyone to wonder what your point was. 

It's quite common for you to complain after the fact.

[GMDino]

(03-31-2024, 10:54 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: you posted the Article, with no comments or thoughts of your own to steer the conversation and left everyone to wonder what your point was. 

It's quite common for you to complain after the fact.

The article was perfectly clear.  Twitter was involved in a lawsuit about sharing info.  When it ended Musk continued sharing info after complaining about it happening.

It's in the title...lol.

The article acknowledges that Twitter is not the only one that does this but that this was about the lawsuit and what Musk has said.

Here comes the Musk defenders to complain about something that was already said just to stop criticism of Musk.

You could say he's not a hypocrite and try to prove that. Or you could ignore the post completely.

Then, when it's pointed out they say I'm complaining about it.

Crazy.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-01-2024, 09:09 AM)GMDino Wrote: The article was perfectly clear.  Twitter was involved in a lawsuit about sharing info.  When it ended Musk continued sharing info after complaining about it happening.

It's in the title...lol.

The article acknowledges that Twitter is not the only one that does this but that this was about the lawsuit and what Musk has said.

Here comes the Musk defenders to complain about something that was already said just to stop criticism of Musk.

You could say he's not a hypocrite and try to prove that.  Or you could ignore the post completely.

Then, when it's pointed out they say I'm complaining about it.

Crazy.

The lawsuit was going on before Musk brought the company. 


But more importantly, you haven't listed your stance on this? just mumbo-jumbo. 
Make a stance and the we can discuss it the way you want, none of us are mind readers so I don't have the time or energy to waste trying to figure out your point.

Step up to the plate and make your point

[GMDino]

(04-01-2024, 10:20 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: The lawsuit was going on before Musk brought the company. 


But more importantly, you haven't listed your stance on this? just mumbo-jumbo. 
Make a stance and the we can discuss it the way you want, none of us are mind readers so I don't have the time or energy to waste trying to figure out your point.

Step up to the plate and make your point

Yes, that was in the story.

I am on record that Musk is a hypocrite.  This was just another sample of it.  

Musk claims to stand for "free speech" but regularly stifles speech that criticizes him, for example.

This is just another example of him complaining about Twitter giving information to law enforcement and then him doing the same thing.

I suppose I could have pulled back up the old Musk thread and added it there but you probably complain about bringing back old threads too. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(04-01-2024, 10:28 AM)GMDino Wrote: Yes, that was in the story.

I am on record that Musk is a hypocrite.  This was just another sample of it.  

Musk claims to stand for "free speech" but regularly stifles speech that criticizes him, for example.

This is just another example of him complaining about Twitter giving information to law enforcement and then him doing the same thing.

I suppose I could have pulled back up the old Musk thread and added it there but you probably complain about bringing back old threads too. 

I wouldn't waste so much time with caring about their opinions, especially if they are pushing political opinions. Everyone has an opinion and it's for their own reasons, if you are easily swayed by others then you really don't have a firm set of beliefs.

I only go to those sites for videos with laughs. 

Now if people haven't figured out by now that anything you do/say on those public sites can come back to haunt you, then well that's your own stupidity. 
People get fired for comments/posts for expressing or getting caught doing dumb things. Heck isn't there a teacher that got caught doing soft porn on an Only me or whatever that site is called? 

You can't expect anything you do online to be "private".