Grooming Booms in the UK
November 12, 2024
The ability of the Internet to connect us to one another can be a beautiful thing. On the flip side, however, are growing problems like this one: The UK’s Independent tells us, “Online Grooming Crimes Reach Record Levels, NSPCC Says.” UK police recorded over 7,000 offenses in that country over the past year, a troubling new high. We learn:
“The children’s charity said the figures, provided by 45 UK police forces, showed that 7,062 sexual communication with a child offences were recorded in 2023-24, a rise of 89% since 2017-18, when the offence first came into force. Where the means of communication was disclosed – which was 1,824 cases – social media platforms were often used, with Snapchat named in 48% of those cases. Meta-owned platforms were also found to be popular with offenders, with WhatsApp named in 12% of those cases, Facebook and Messenger in 12% and Instagram in 6%. In response to the figures, the NSPCC has urged online regulator Ofcom to strengthen the Online Safety Act. It said there is currently too much focus on acting after harm has taken place, rather than being proactive to ensure the design of social media platforms does not contribute to abuse.”
Well, yes, that would be ideal. Specifically, the NSPCC states, regulations around private messaging must be strengthened. UK Minister Jess Phillips emphasizes:
“Social media companies have a responsibility to stop this vile abuse from happening on their platforms. Under the Online Safety Act they will have to stop this kind of illegal content being shared on their sites, including on private and encrypted messaging services, or face significant fines.”
Those fines would have to be significant indeed. Much larger than any levied so far, which are but a routine cost of doing business for these huge firms. But we have noted a few reasons to hope for change. Are governments ready to hold big tech responsible for the harms they facilitate?
Cynthia Murrell, November 12, 2024
Instragram Does the YouTube Creator Fear Thing
November 11, 2024
Instagram influencers are enraged by CEO Adam Mosseri’s bias towards popular content. According to the BBC in, “Instagram Lowering Quality Of Less Viewed Videos ‘Alarming’ Creators”, video quality is lowered for older, less popular videos. More popular content gets the HD white glove treatment. Influencers are upset over this “discrimination,” especially when they concentrate on making income through Instagram over other platforms.
The influences view the lower quality output as harmful and affects the quality of original art. Mosseri argues that most influencers have their videos watched soon after publication. The only videos being affected by lower quality are older and no longer receive many views. While that sounds logical, it could also create a cycle that benefits only a few influencers:
Social media consultant Matt Navarra told the BBC the move ‘seems to somewhat contradict Instagram’s earlier messages or efforts to encourage new creators’.
"How can creators gain traction if their content is penalized for not being popular," he said. And he said it could risk creating a cycle of more established creators reaping the rewards of higher engagement from viewers over those trying to build their following.”
Instagram is lowering the quality to save on costs. It always comes down money, doesn’t it? When asked to respond about that, Mosseri said viewers are more interested in a video’s content over its image quality. Navarra agreed to that statement:
“He [Navarra] said creators should focus on how they can make engaging content that caters to their audience, rather than be overly concerned by the possibility of its quality being degraded by Instagram.”
Navarra’s right. Video quality will be decent and not poor like a cathode-ray tube TV. The creators should focus on building themselves and not investing all of their creative energy into one platform. Diversify!
Whitney Grace, November 11, 2024
The Sweet Odor of Musk
October 31, 2024
The old Twitter was a boon for academics. It was a virtual gathering place where they could converse with each other, the general public, and even lawmakers. Information was spread and discussed far and wide. The platform was also a venue for conducting online research. Now, though, scholars seem to be withering under the “Musk effect.” Cambridge University Press shares its researchers’ paper, “The Vibes Are Off: Did Elon Musk Push Academics Off Twitter?”
The abstract begins by noting several broad impacts of Twitter’s transition to “X,” as Elon Musk has renamed it: Most existing employees were laid-off. Access to its data was monetized. Its handling of censorship and misinformation has were upended and its affordances shifted. But the scope of this paper is more narrow. Researchers James Bisbee and Kevin Munger set out to answer:
“What did Elon Musk’s takeover of the platform mean for this academic ecosystem? Using a snowball sample of more than 15,700 academic accounts from the fields of economics, political science, sociology, and psychology, we show that academics in these fields reduced their ‘engagement’ with the platform, measured by either the number of active accounts (i.e., those registering any behavior on a given day) or the number of tweets written (including original tweets, replies, retweets, and quote tweets).”
Why did scholars disengage? The “Musk Effect,” as the paper calls it, was a mix of factors. Changes to the verification process and account-name rules were part of it. Many were upset when Musk nixed the free API they’d relied on for research in a range of fields. But much of it was simply a collective disgust at the new owner’s unscientific nature, childishness, and affinity for conspiracy theories. The researchers write:
“We argue that a combination of these features of the threat and then the reality of Musk’s ownership of the Twitter corporation influenced academics either to quit Twitter altogether or at least reduce their engagement with the platform (i.e., ‘disengage’). The policy changes and personality of Twitter’s new owner were difficult to avoid and may have made the experience of using the platform less palatable. Conversely, these same attributes may have stimulated a type of ideological boycott, in which academics disengaged with Twitter as a political strategy to indicate their intellectual and moral opposition.”
See the paper for a description of its methodology, the detailed results (complete with charts), and a discussion of the factors behind the Musk Effect. It also describes the role pre-X Twitter played in academic research. Check out section 1 to learn what the scientific community lost when one bratty billionaire decided to make a spite purchase the size of small country’s gross domestic product.
Cynthia Murrell, October 31, 2024
That AI Technology Is Great for Some Teens
October 29, 2024
The New York Times ran and seemed to sensationalized a story about a young person who formed an emotional relationship with AI from Character.ai. I personally like the Independent’s story “The Disturbing Messages Shared between AI Chatbot and Teen Who Took His Own Life,” which was redisplayed on the estimable MSN.com. If the link is dead, please, don’t write Beyond Search. Contact those ever responsible folks at Microsoft. The British “real” news outfit said:
Sewell [the teen] had started using Character.AI in April 2023, shortly after he turned 14. In the months that followed, the teen became “noticeably withdrawn,” withdrew from school and extracurriculars, and started spending more and more time online. His time on Character.AI grew to a “harmful dependency,” the suit states.
Let’s shift gears. The larger issues is that social media has changed the way humans interact with each other and smart software. The British are concerned. For instance, the BBC delves into how social media has changed human interaction: “How Have Social Media Algorithms Changed The Way We Interact?”
Social media algorithms are fifteen years old. Facebook unleashed the first in 2009 and the world changed. The biggest problem associated with social media algorithms are the addiction and excess. Teenagers and kids are the populations most affected by social media and adults want to curb their screen time. Global governments are steeping up to enforce rules on social media.
The US could ban TikTok if the Chinese parent company doesn’t sell it. The UK implemented a new online safety act for content moderation, while the EU outlined new rules for tech companies. The rules will fine them 6% of turnover and suspend them if they don’t prevent election interference. Meanwhile Brazil banned X for a moment until the company agreed to have a legal representative in the country and blocked accounts that questioned the legitimacy of the country’s last election.
While the regulation laws pose logical arguments, they also limit free speech. Regulating the Internet could tip the scale from anarchy to authoritarianism:
“Adam Candeub is a law professor and a former advisor to President Trump, who describes himself as a free speech absolutist. Social media is ‘polarizing, it’s fractious, it’s rude, it’s not elevating – I think it’s a terrible way to have public discourse”, he tells the BBC. “But the alternative, which I think a lot of governments are pushing for, is to make it an instrument of social and political control and I find that horrible.’ Professor Candeub believes that, unless ‘there is a clear and present danger’ posed by the content, ‘the best approach is for a marketplace of ideas and openness towards different points of view.’”
When Musk purchased X, he compared it to a “digital town square.” Social media, however, isn’t like a town square because the algorithms rank and deliver content based what eyeballs want to see. There isn’t fair and free competition of ideas. The smart algorithms shape free speech based on what users want to see and what will make money.
So where are we? Headed to the grave yard?
Whitney Grace, October 29, 2024
Four Years of Research Proves What a Teacher Knows in Five Minutes
October 22, 2024
Just a humanoid processing information related to online services and information access.
The write up “The Phone Ban Has Had a Big Impact on School Work.” No kidding. The article reports a study in Iceland after schools told students, “No mobiles.” The write up says:
A phone ban has been in place at Öldutún School since the beginning of 2019, and according to the principal, it has worked well. The school’s atmosphere and culture have changed for the better, and there is more peace in the classroom.
I assume “peace” means students sort of paying attention, not scrolling TikTok and firing off Snapchats of total coolness. (I imagine a nice looking codfish on the school cafeteria food line. But young people may have different ideas about what’s cool. But I’ve been to Iceland, and to some, fish are quite fetching.)
A typical classroom somewhere in Kentucky. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. The “new and improved version” is a struggle. But so are MSFT security and Windows updates. How is Sam AI-Man these days?
Unfortunately the school without mobiles has not been able to point to newly sprouted genius level performance since the 2019 ban. I am okay with the idea of peace in the classroom.
The write up points out:
It has been reported in Morgunblaðið that students who spend more time on smartphones are less interested in reading than those who use their phones little or not at all. The interest in reading is waning faster and faster as students spend more time on their smart devices. These are the results of research by Kristján Ketill Stefánsson, assistant professor of pedagogy at the University of Iceland’s Faculty of Education. The research is based on data from more than fifteen thousand students in grades 6 to 10 in 120 elementary schools across the country.
I noted this surprising statement:
Both students and parents have welcomed the phone ban, as it was prepared for a whole year in collaboration with the board of the student association, school council and parents, according to Víðisson.
Would this type of ban on mobiles in the classroom work in the expensive private schools in some cities? What about schools in what might be called less salubrious geographic areas? Iceland is one culture; rural Kentucky is another.
My reaction to the write up is positive. The conclusions seem obvious to me and no study was needed. My instincts are that mobile devices are not appropriate for any learning environment. That includes college classrooms and lecture rooms for continuing education credits. But I am a dinobaby. (I look like the little orange dinosaur. What do I know?)
Stephen E Arnold, October 22, 2024
Hey, France, Read Your Pavel-Grams: I Cooperate
October 18, 2024
Just a humanoid processing information related to online services and information access.
Did you know that Telegram has shared IPs since 2018. Do your homework!
Telegram is a favored message application, because it is supposed to protect user privacy, especially for crypto users. Not say, says Coin Telegraph in the article, “Telegram Has Been Disclosing User IPs Since 2018, Durov Says.” Before you start posting nasty comments about Telegram’s lies, the IPs the message is sharing belong to bad actors. CEO Pavel Durov shared on his Telegram channel that his company reports phone numbers and IP addresses to law enforcement.
The company has been disclosing criminal information to authorities since 2018, but only when proper legal procedure is followed. Telegram abides by formal legal requests when they are from relevant communication lines. Durov stressed that Telegram remains an anonymous centered app:
Durov said the news from last week showed that Telegram has been “streamlining and unifying its privacy policy across different countries.” He stressed that Telegram’s core principles haven’t changed, as the company has always sought to comply with relevant local laws ‘as long as they didn’t go against our values of freedom and privacy.’ He added: ‘Telegram was built to protect activists and ordinary people from corrupt governments and corporations — we do not allow criminals to abuse our platform or evade justice.”’
French authorities indicted Durov in August 2024 on six charges related to illicit activity via Telegram. He posted the $5.5 million bail in September, then revealed to the public how his company complies with legal requests after calling the charges misguided.
Kudos for Telegram disclosing the information to be transparent.
Whitney Grace, October 18, 2024
FOGINT: UN Says Telegram Is a Dicey Outfit
October 14, 2024
The only smart software involved in producing this short FOGINT post was Microsoft Copilot’s estimable art generation tool. Why? It is offered at no cost.
One of my colleagues forwarded a dump truck of links to articles about a UN Report. Before commenting on the report, I want to provide a snapshot of the crappy Web search tools and the useless “search” function on the UN Web site.
First, the title of the October 2024 report is:
Transnational Organized Crime and the Convergence of Cyber-Enabled Fraud, Underground Banking and Technological Innovation in Southeast Asia: A Shifting Threat Landscape
I want to point out that providing a full title in an online article is helpful to some dinobabies like me.
Second, including an explicit link to a document is also appreciated by some people, most of whom are over 25 years in age, of above average intelligence, and interested in online crime. With that in mind, here is the explicit link to the document:
https://www.unodc.org/roseap/uploads/documents/Publications/2024/TOC_Convergence_Report_2024.pdf
Now let’s look briefly at what the 142 page report says:
Telegram is a dicey outfit.
Not bad: 142 pages compressed to five words. Let look at two specifics and then I encourage you to read the full report and draw your own conclusions about the quite clever outfit Telegram.
The first passage which caught my attention was this one which is a list of the specialized software and services firms paying attention to Telegram. Here is that list. It is important because most of these outfits make their presence known to enforcement and intelligence entities, not the TikTok-type crowd:
Bitrace
Chainalysis
Chainargos
Chainvestigate
ChongLuaDao (Viet Nam)
Coeus
Crystal Intelligence
CyberArmor
Flare Systems
Flashpoint
Group-IB
Hensoldt Analytics
Intel 471
Kela
Magnet Forensics
Resecurity
Sophos
SlowMist
Trend Micro
TRM Labs
Other firms played ball with the UN, but these companies may have suggested, “Don’t tell anyone we assisted.” That’s my view; yours may differ.
The second interesting passage in the document for me was:
Southeast Asia faces unprecedented challenges posed by transnational organized crime and illicit economies. The region is witnessing a major convergence of different crime types and criminal services fueled by rapid and shifting advancements in physical, technological, and digital infrastructure have have allowed organized crime networks to expand these operations.
Cyber crime is the hot ticket in southeast Asia. I would suggest that the Russian oligarchs are likely to get a run for their money if these well-groomed financial wizards try to muscle in on what is a delightful mix of time Triads, sleek MBAs, and testosterone fueled crypto kiddies with motos, weapons and programming expertise. The mix of languages, laws, rules, and special purpose trade zones add some zest to the run-of-the-mill brushing activities. I will not suggest that many individuals who visit or live in Southeast Asia have a betting gene, but the idea is one worthy of Stuart Kauffman and his colleagues at the Santa Fe Institute. Gambling emerges from chaos and good old greed.
A third passage which I circled addressed Telegram. By the way, “Telegram” appears more than 100 times in the document. Here’s the snippet:
Providing further indication of criminal activity, Kokang casinos and associated companies have developed a robust presence across so-called ‘grey and black business’ Telegram channels facilitating cross-border ‘blockchain’ gambling, underground banking, money laundering, and related recruitment in Myanmar, Cambodia, China, and several other countries in East and Southeast Asia.
The key point to me is that this is a workflow process with a system and method spanning countries. The obvious problem is, “Whom does law enforcement arrest?” Another issue, “Where is the Telegram server?” The answer to the first question is, “In France.” The second question is more tricky and an issue that the report does not address. This is a problematic omission. The answer to the “Where is the Telegram server?” is, “In lots of places.” Telegram is into dApps or distributed applications. The servers outside of Moscow and St Petersburg are virtual. The providers or enablers of Telegram probably don’t know Telegram is a customer and have zero clue what’s going on in virtual machines running Telegram’s beefy infrastructure.
The report is worth reading. If you are curious about Telegram’s plumbing, please, write benkent2020 at yahoo dot com. The FOGINT team has a lecture about the components of the Telegram architecture as well as some related information about the company’s most recent social plays.
Stephen E Arnold, October 14, 2024
Social Media: A Glimpse of What Ignorance Fosters
September 27, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
The US Federal Trade Commission has published a free report. “A Look Behind the Screens Examining the Data Practices of Social Media and Video Streaming Services” is about 80 pages comprising the actual report. The document covers:
- A legal framework for social media and streaming services
- Some basic information about the companies mentioned in the report
- The data “practices” of the companies (I would have preferred the phrase “procedures and exploitation”)
- Advertising practices (my suggestion is to name the section “revenue generation and maximization”)
- Algorithms, Data Analytics, or AI
- Children and teens
The document includes comments about competition (er, what?), some conclusions, and FTC staff recommendations.
From the git-go, the document uses an acronym: SMVSSs which represents Social Media and Video Streaming Services. The section headings summarize the scope of the document. The findings are ones which struck me as fairly obvious; specifically:
- People have no idea how much data are collected, analyzed, and monetized
- Revenue is generated by selling ad which hook to the user data
- Lots of software (dumb and smart) are required to make the cost of operations as efficient as possible
- Children’s system use and their data are part of the game plan.
The report presents assorted “should do” and “must do.” These too are obvious; for example, “Companies should implement policies that would ensure greater protection of children and teens.”
I am a dinobaby. Commercial enterprises are going to do what produces revenue and market reach. “Should” and “would” are nice verbs. Without rules and regulations the companies just do what companies do. Consequences were needed more than two decades ago. Now the idea of “fixing up” social media is an idea which begs for reasonable solutions. Some countries just block US social media outfits; others infiltrate the organizations and use them and the data as an extension of a regime’s capabilities. A few countries think that revenue and growth are just dandy. Do you live in one of these nation states?
Net net: Worth reading. I want a T shirt that says SMVSSs.
Stephen E Arnold, September 27, 2024
Discord: Following the Telegram Road Map?
September 26, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
A couple of weeks ago, I presented some Telegram (the company in Dubai’s tax-free zone) information. My team and I created a timeline, a type of information display popular among investigators and intelligence analysts. The idea is that if one can look at events across a span of hours, days, months, or years in the case of Telegram, one can get some insight into what I call the “innovation cadence” of the entity, staff growth or loss, type of business activity in which the outfit engages, etc.
Some high-technology outfits follow road maps in circulation for a decade or more. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.
I read “Discord Launches End-to-End Encrypted Voice and Video Chats.” This social media outfit is pushing forward with E2EE. Because the company is located in the US, the firm operates under the umbrella of US laws, rules, and regulations. Consequently, US government officials can obtain documents which request certain information from the company. I want to skip over this announcement and the E2EE system and methods which Discord is using or will use as it expands its services.
I want to raise the question, “Is Discord following the Telegram road map?” Telegram is, as you probably know, is not providing end-to-end encryption by default. In order to send a “secret” encrypted message, one has to click through several screens and send a message to a person who must be online to make the Telegram system work. However, Telegram provides less sophisticated methods of keeping messages private. These tactics include a split between public Groups and private Groups. Clever Telegram users can use Telegram as a back end from which to deliver ransomware or engage in commercial transactions. One of the important points to keep in mind is that US-based E2EE outfits have far fewer features than Telegram. Furthermore, our research suggests that Telegram indeed a plan. The company has learned from its initial attempt to create a crypto play. Now the “structure” of Telegram involves an “open” foundation with an alleged operation in Zug, Switzerland, which some describe as the crypto nerve center of central Europe. Plus, Telegram is busy trying to deploy a global version of the VKontakte (the Russian Facebook) for Telegram users, developers, crypto players, and tire kickers.
Several observations:
- Discord’s innovations are essentially variants of something Telegram’s engineers implemented years ago
- The Discord operation is based in the US which has quite different rules, laws, and tax regulations than Dubai
- Telegram is allegedly becoming more cooperative with law enforcement because the company wants to pull off an initial public offering.
Will Discord follow the Telegram road map, undertaking the really big plays; specifically, integrated crypto, an IPO, and orders of magnitude more features and functional capabilities?
I don’t know the answer to this question, but E2EE seems to be a buzzword that is gaining traction now that the AI craziness is beginning to lose some of its hyperbolicity. However, it is important to keep in mind that Telegram is pushing forward far more aggressively than US social media companies. As Telegram approaches one billion users, it could make inroads into the US and tip over some digital apple carts. The answer to my question is, “Probably not. US companies often ignore details about non-US entities.” Perhaps Discord’s leadership should take a closer look at the Telegram operation which spans Discord functionality, YouTube hooks, open source tactics, its own crypto, and its recent social media unit?
Stephen E Arnold, September 26, 2024
Consistency Manifested by Mr. Musk and the Delightfully Named X.com
September 25, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
You know how to build credibility: Be consistent, be sort of nice, be organized. I found a great example of what might be called anti-credibility in “Elon Rehires lawyers in Brazil, Removes Accounts He Insisted He Wouldn’t Remove.” The write up says:
Elon Musk fought the Brazilian law, and it looks like the Brazilian law won. After making a big show of how he was supposedly standing up for free speech, Elon caved yet again.
The article interprets the show of inconsistency and the abrupt about face this way:
So, all of this sounds like Elon potentially realizing that he did his “oh, look at me, I’m a free speech absolutist” schtick, it caused ExTwitter to lose a large chunk of its userbase, and now he’s back to playing ball again. Because, like so much that he’s done since taking over Twitter, he had no actual plan to deal with these kinds of demands from countries.
I agree, but I think the action illustrates a very significant point about Mr. Musk and possibly sheds light on how other US tech giants who get in regulatory trouble and lose customers will behave. Specifically, they knock off the master of the universe attitude and adopt the “scratch my belly” demeanor of a French bulldog wanting to be liked.
The failure to apply sanctions on companies which willfully violate a nation state’s laws has been one key to the rise of the alleged monopolies spawned in the US. Once a country takes action, the trilling from the French bulldog signals a behavioral change.
Now flip this around. Why do some regulators have an active dislike for some US high technology firms? The lack of respect for the law and the attitude of US super moguls might help answer the question.
I am certain many government officials find the delightfully named X.com and the mercurial Mr. Musk a topic of conversation. No wonder some folks love X.com so darned much. The approach used in Brazil and France hopefully signals consequences for those outfits who believe no mere nation state can do anything significant.
Stephen E Arnold, September 25, 2024
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
