There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

MediaBiasFactChecker Bot ,

The news source of this post could not be identified. Please check the source yourself. Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

A_A ,
@A_A@lemmy.world avatar

TF1 (… standing for Télévision Française 1) is a French commercial television network … TF1’s average market share of 24% makes it the most popular (french) domestic network.

Deceptichum ,
@Deceptichum@quokk.au avatar

I can really see how this bot helps the moderation team and somehow lowers their volume of work as they’ve claimed multiple times for keeping it around despite everyone hating it for some reason or another.

catloaf ,

Everyone hates it because it’s bad data.

Edit: no, strike that, it’s not even data, it’s just one guy’s opinion.

A_A , (edited )
@A_A@lemmy.world avatar

Pavel Valeryevich Durov(Russian: Павел Валерьевич Дуров; born 10 October 1984)[4] is a Russian-born Emirati entrepreneur who is known for founding the social networking site VK and the app Telegram Messenger. He is the younger brother of Nikolai Durov. As of 29 September 2022, his net worth is estimated at US$15.1 billion. In 2022, he was recognized as the richest expat in the United Arab Emirates, according to Forbes. In February 2023, Arabian Business named him the most powerful entrepreneur in Dubai.

<a href=""></a>
translation of major allegation :
“The (French) Justice system considers that the lack of moderation, cooperation with law enforcement, and the tools offered by Telegram (disposable numbers, cryptocurrencies, etc.) make it an accomplice to drug trafficking, pedocriminal offenses, and scams.”

conciselyverbose ,

What a fucking horseshit excuse for law enforcement.

Encrypted communication should be a human right.

xnx ,

I agree but its not even an encrypted messenger. Almost no one uses the weak encryption and im pretty sure they offer decryption to governments considering they were threatened to be banned in russia and avoided it

kescusay ,
@kescusay@lemmy.world avatar

Yes, but… I mean, it is being used for all of that.

conciselyverbose ,

It doesn’t matter in the slightest.

Making a tool that provides a private communication service literally everyone should have unrestricted access to does not make you an accomplice to anything.

Deceptichum ,
@Deceptichum@quokk.au avatar

So is the Internet, better go arrest my ISP.

lennybird ,
@lennybird@lemmy.world avatar

The ISP will absolutely cooperate with law enforcement though, unlike telegram. That seems the nature of the issue in that there is a lack of moderation and oversight, which anonymity is not mutually-exclusive from flagging nefarious activities, ideally. I REALLY am not too keen on giving safe harbor to the likes of pedos and traffickers and what have you.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

As always, there’s a lot of nuance which is lost on Lemmy users.

It’s a question of exactly what telegram is being used for, what telegram the company can reasonably be aware of, what they’ve been asked to do, and what they’ve done.

webghost0101 ,

It is but so are phones and computers in general. Same with cars, many crimes require transportation.

einkorn ,
@einkorn@feddit.org avatar

The issue I see with Telegram is that they retain a certain control over the content on their platform, as they have blocked channels in the past. That’s unlike for example Signal, which only acts as a carrier for the encrypted data.

If they have control over what people are able to share via their platform, the relevant laws should apply, imho.

ravhall ,

Gotta add that “pedocriminal” thing so people don’t argue against it. Don’t wanna be seen “supporting pedocriminals” by supporting encrypted communications

stonerboner ,

The catch-22 is that it’s impossible to make this tool freely available as-is without also enabling the child abuse. You can’t pry the apart, or at the very least nobody has managed to yet.

So do we accept the abuse and let it proliferate, in the name of privacy? Or do we sacrifice privacy to make sure theres not a safe place for abusers?

There is no answer where no one gets hurt. It sucks when the interests of good align with the interests of bad, and it’s a shit show one way or the other.

ravhall ,

The Catholic Church abuses kids, so… ban that. Ban adults alone in a room with a child—something could happen. Oh, sometimes they get abuse at school… so, that’s gotta go. Oh no, they get abused on the internet… bye bye internet.

You can’t say “this could be used to abuse a child” because you could abuse a child with a spoon, but I’ll be damned if I’ll eat soup with a fork.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •