Facebook Violence Curbs Thwarted by Groups Using Code Words (bloomberg.com) 289
An anonymous reader shares a report: When President Donald Trump urged Americans last month to "LIBERATE VIRGINIA" on Twitter, a private Facebook group named "Boogaloo Enthusiasts: CORONAPOCALYPSE" welcomed the tweet. "Did Trump just call for boogaloo?," one member wrote, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. "Well, you heard the man! Let's go bois," another responded. Membership in Facebook groups focused on violent anti-government uprisings in the U.S. has doubled in recent weeks as the coronavirus pandemic has spread and governments impose restrictions aimed at slowing the contagion.
To get their message across, these groups are exploiting loopholes in Facebook anti-violence policies -- using satire, code words and other tactics that mask their motives, according to experts who follow fringe groups on social media. One of the more common such phrases is "boogaloo," which can refer to a kind of music but more recently has come to describe a pending civil war. The boogaloo groups, and other extremist groups deploying similar tactics, pose yet another test for the Menlo Park, California-based social media giant, as it tries to strike a workable balance between allowing free discourse and curbing disinformation or those encouraging violence and law breaking.
To get their message across, these groups are exploiting loopholes in Facebook anti-violence policies -- using satire, code words and other tactics that mask their motives, according to experts who follow fringe groups on social media. One of the more common such phrases is "boogaloo," which can refer to a kind of music but more recently has come to describe a pending civil war. The boogaloo groups, and other extremist groups deploying similar tactics, pose yet another test for the Menlo Park, California-based social media giant, as it tries to strike a workable balance between allowing free discourse and curbing disinformation or those encouraging violence and law breaking.
That can't possibly backfire (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:That can't possibly backfire (Score:4, Insightful)
There is no win-win.
You have people, some with influential positions, posting incorrect and dangerous advice. We having a lot of people doing the equivalent of screaming fire in a crowded theater. This is on the edge of free speech tolerance, and sometimes past it.
However I feel, that if you feel the need to Code your speech, you are probably saying something that is bad and you know it is bad.
Re:That can't possibly backfire (Score:4, Insightful)
you are probably saying something that is bad and you know it is bad
--Xi Jinping
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
"Billy, are you leading another group of violent anarchists again? You better stop that before I have to ground you!"
"Aw mom, you never let me have any fun!"
Re: That can't possibly backfire (Score:3)
I fully trust Zuck with my privacy. Why not trust him with my speech, too?
Re: That can't possibly backfire (Score:2)
And if they think it is a real cover, those actually committing offenses, rather than just writing nonsense they won't do is private groups, will find it isn't. Governments have managed to track better codes than these types can come up with.
Re: (Score:2)
And encrypted messages are only used by scoundrels.
Oh my how Slashdot has fallen.
Re: (Score:2)
We having a lot of people doing the equivalent of screaming fire in a crowded theater.
No we aren't. No is being trampled because someone said "boogaloo" on the internet.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Giving merit to quotes from a very partisan and somewhat extremist group themselves, doesn't help matters a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
NO.
If you need to say something, and feel the need for a anonymity, then it's a safe bet someone else has implied, or explicitly threatened, violence to curb your speech.
Fuck no.
Re: (Score:2)
"If you need to say something, and feel the need for a anonymity"
Isn't that what voting is?
Re: (Score:2)
That's why your vote is secret.
Because people still get beat up or murdered in part of the world for voting the wrong way. That's the violence.
Re: (Score:2)
However I feel, that if you feel the need to Code your speech, you are probably saying something that is bad and you know it is bad.
This is so true. But what I've always found funny about speaking in code, is how difficult it is to do without arising suspicion that you are in fact speaking in code.
Like, If my kids were sitting at the dinner table having a normal conversation, and I asked them how their day was, if one of them were to lean into the other and say lightly, "The crow just landed in it's nest", I'd be in tears!
But, I guess that's what I find so funny about it. I have to believe most people are probably pretty good at picki
Re: (Score:3)
I think the argument is that by getting them off massive platforms limits the casual readership which makes sense if your goal is to limit distribution of these views. I'm not entirely sure I buy into this being a good thing, although I do also understand that 30 years ago if you were advocating a racial
What, " violent anti-government uprisings"? (Score:2)
I must have missed them in the news.
Re: (Score:2)
I must have missed them in the news.
The protests were not physically violent, but they were verbally violent. Many of the signs displayed harsh statements, some with incorrect grammar.
Re: (Score:3)
The protests were not physically violent, but they were verbally violent. Many of the signs displayed harsh statements, some with incorrect grammar.
+1 Funny!
Re: (Score:2)
You can only take my Electric Boogaloo DVD from my cold dead hands!
(I have to apologize here if what I just said turns out to be a code word to activate a sleeper cell of anti-government rappers)
SPLC (Score:2)
Don't use Facebook (Score:5, Insightful)
Censorship is a losing strategy. They won't be able to censor as much as they want and they'll alienate random Facebook users in the process.
Facebook is a parasitic, exploitative platform. The algorithms promote and encourage the worst behavior because it attracts attention. Ad revenue follows attention. Everyone should stop using Facebook.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Censorship works reasonably well in China, the difference is that they have large numbers of humans working on the problem. Facebook is too cheap to employ people to censor so uses simple word matching which is easily bypassed.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I would argue that the Stasi were inefficient and only marginally effective. They could interfere with samizdat at a huge cost, but they couldn't shut it down.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You understand that large groups of morons destroying telecommunication equipment and planning civil war is a bad thing though right? Just checking.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not quite that black and white but certainly Chinese censorship is bad.
The Chinese are more motivated, Facebook does it only to the extent required to ward off lawsuits and regulation.
Re: (Score:3)
Whose face the boot is on shouldn’t influence whether or not you condone an action. It usually turns out that it doesn’t take long for the boot to end up on your own, and I have a feeling you won’t like it very much.
Re: (Score:2)
Will I quite like censoring spam and revenge porn. The former I mostly outsource to Google.
Re: (Score:2)
Will I quite like censoring spam and revenge porn. The former I mostly outsource to Google.
I don't disagree with you on the latter. If Facebook were only censoring revenge porn, this wouldn't be an issue. Conversely, I'm pretty sure Google allows you to turn off the spam filtering if you want, and even if they don't, you can have completely uncensored e-mail without losing access to e-mail itself by using other e-mail services, or rolling your own if you're sufficiently determined.
The problem is that there's no such thing as 'unfiltered Facebook', where you could roll your own OpenFB server, get
Re: (Score:2)
Life encourages dehumanization. I say we kill everyone.
Re: Don't use Facebook (Score:2)
You don't realise boots have good uses? Like when walking in muddy ground. Goshyour back and white world must be simpler.
Re: (Score:3)
I have to admit, free speech has lost its appeal in the past couple years.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Don't use Facebook (Score:2)
Safe spaces and ideological echo chambers are so warm n fuzzy n cozy and where's my stuffy and blanky?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, not really.
No, in fact, not at all. Freedom of speech is at its most valuable when the words are ugly and the stakes are high.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to admit, free speech has lost its appeal in the past couple years.
That's because you disagree with the speakers.
Re: (Score:3)
Freedom of any kind comes with an obligation, that's what most people conveniently block out. The freedom to own and use a gun comes with the obligation to use it in a way that does not harm your fellow man. The freedom to vote comes with the obligation that you take responsibility for your government.
The freedom of speech comes with the obligation to listen, to evaluate and to learn enough to be able to do that. And like with the other obligations, people tend to ignore it. Uncle Ben is right, power comes
Re: (Score:2)
You understand that censorship is a bad thing though right? Just checking.
It's not an absolute term. Not all censorship is bad. Most of it is actually. I'd say 95% of censorship shouldn't exist. But some of these toxic ass groups I've seen shouldn't be given any kind of platform. So there's no need to sit here and play the moral imperative or slippery slope angle. Some of these groups are just so bad they do not deserve free speech. Where the line in the sand that's drawn is a fight eternal, we will always debate about where in the sand to draw censorship. That's exactly
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By reasonably well, you mean, people who say the wrong things are dissapeared or imprisoned because there is no such thing as legally as freedom of speech or freedom of thought. More over communist generally view 'diversity' ( or at least the wrong kind of diversity) as a BAD thing because it tends to disrupt full contribution to the collective.
Re: (Score:3)
Censorship is a losing strategy. They won't be able to censor as much as they want and they'll alienate random Facebook users in the process
I think people are missing the point here.
Facebook is now way more than just the website Facebook and if it goes down in fire, Facebook the company will be just fine. They'll still draw as much blood out of Facebook the website as they can, but yeah, once it gets too toxic and the censorship drives everyone away, it won't really be any kind of significant loss.
That is not "Oh no! What will they do when they have to censorship the fuck out of everyone!?" That is actually part of the plan. The idea is to
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... there are other forums that will let you post whatever alt-right hate speech you want. Go post in one of those instead. Leave Facebook for its intended purpose in life... posting pictures of your kids for relatives who are too lazy to come and visit once in awhile.
Leetspeak on BBSes (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Leetspeak on BBSes (Score:2)
What encryption?
Re: Leetspeak on BBSes (Score:2)
I long for the days of Kermit with built in encryption.....
Re: (Score:2)
xmodem forever!
I bet! (Score:3)
This must be the first time in history when people avoid attracting the attention of authorities by communicating in code.
Thank goodness Facebook was not around during the communist regimes of old; all of us would have been in a Gulag!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is it that Leftists are able to understand this code? Why are they the ones who always hear the secret white supremacist dog-whistles?
It's almost as if that's just become a standard tactic of the Left to immediately brand any opinion they don't like as racist so they can poison any debate and dehumanize those who dare disagree with them about socialism.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly for the same reaosn the right tries to use the "communist/socialist" killer phrase? It's not like the left is the only ones who try to derail communications by using terminating cliches.
Re: I bet! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The word "socialist" is being passed around for anything left of center these days, it's not used only for Bernie. Hillary? Socialist! Whistleblowers? Socialists! Coronavirus? Socialist! Not wanting tarrifs? Socialist! Pro-union? Socialist! Voted Democrat for at least one candidate? Socialist!
McCarthy was right, they're everywhere!
Re: (Score:3)
Re: I bet! (Score:2)
Nadsat (Score:5, Funny)
I viddy some malchik has the keeskhas to ask for a bit ofthe old in-and-out game and the ultra violence. That's really horrorshow.
This is ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:This is ridiculous (Score:5, Interesting)
This, exactly this. I'd laugh if it wasn't so sad how every time someone comes up with an in joke, a certain segment of society deems it hate speech and demands it get shutdown. Like that OK symbol.
The people doing this don't realize that they're being trolled by the ones who convinced them it was a real threat.
SPLC? (Score:3, Informative)
The SPLC is a thoroughly discredited hate group. How does this make it to Slashdot???
Re: (Score:2)
Because Slashdot is also a discredited hate group, at least when it comes to politics.
Re: (Score:3)
YouTube people (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That has gotten pretty ridiculous. The pandemic affects pretty much all of daily life. Yet Youtubers have to completely avoid mentioning it or use vague phrases like "the current situation" so the almighty algorithm doesn't demonetize them.
Covid is basically Voldemort. Life imitates art.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Another day another call for censorship (Score:5, Insightful)
Wouldn't be another day ending in Y if there wasn't another call for censorship from the SPLC.
Point at some memes and edgelords et voila, everyone protesting lockdowns is a fringe extremist far-right sympathizer who needs to be banned for the greater good. Complete with the usual "independent" research and oversight committees that just happen to be stacked with members from only one political side.
Re: (Score:2)
So your taking about the new Facebook supreme court then? Set up just in time to be ready for the 2020 election. It is a brilliant move, they can censor all they want and then blame their supreme court (that they hand picked) for the lopsided censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't be another day ending in Y if there wasn't another call for censorship
People should quit facebook in protest
Resistance! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it does. Volts by Amps.
SPLC is a scam (Score:2, Informative)
SPLC are scam artists. They were made as a scam by changing their name to look like another legit organization and rose to fame by defending a lady who received a mere 50K while they took in millions and didn't give a dime to her.
They are a scam group that thrives off of hate.
A little research shows what a scam they are and all their fundraising is done using hate.
Re: (Score:2)
It's basically "never let a good panic go to waste" times "a fool and his money are easily parted".
That's been the formula for easy money for ages.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They are a scam group that thrives off of hate.
And it pays REALLY well: https://freebeacon.com/democra... [freebeacon.com]
Re: (Score:3)
And of course the parent would be modded Troll because they point out honestly what SPLC's M.O. is
The Southern Poverty Law Center is a hate group (Score:2, Insightful)
Why does anyone ever quote them? The Southern Poverty Law Center is itself a hate group. They fulfill their own stated criteria for what defines one. They exist simply to intimidate and silence those they disagree with.
The Facebook Militia... (Score:3)
This is the dumbest timeline.
Give them enough rope to hang themselves (Score:2)
Don't bother censoring the posts or restricting the use of particular words. Let them openly promote, discuss, and plan their acts of violence.
That will make it much easier to obtain a conviction if (when) they follow through on those plans.
Not just boogaloo (Score:2)
Electric boogaloo!
Re: (Score:2)
How come Trump, who is president, gets away with blaming Ãoethe governmentà and his own bad judgement hires?
Because "the government" is made up of career bureaucrats, very few of which are replaced by appointments at every change of administration. It isn't far fetched to imagine many departments staffed by people who will either undermine his policies or drag their heels while implementing them. We don't have socialism (yet), so a Stalinist purge of the intellectuals is not in the cards.
Re: (Score:2)
very few of which are replaced by appointments at every change of administration
Fortunately, because retraining two and a half million people every four years would be absurd. Unfortunately their leadership is what gets changed out every few years, as do the policies that they're supposed to work under, so we're treated to absurdities like the organization in charge of the nations emergency response being run by the guy who mismanaged the American Quarter Horse Association to the edge of bankruptcy. Of course Congress gets their grubby little fingers into the process as well, so the
Re: Trump (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trump assured us during the transition from the Obama administration that he was a great judge of human character. Now that his alleged administration looks like Swiss cheese and no one who isn't a Trump eunuch would work for him, we see the result of his great judgement.
Re: (Score:2)
Logic? Reason? They don't even enjoy observer status in this country anymore, let alone having any kind of say in debates. Or politics for that matter.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah but you know "his followers" didn't make him President. The left did that by pushing Hillary on their voters
Oh puleeeeze. Aren't you conservatives supposed to be all about personal responsibily ? Yet you seem to be jumping through every possible intellectual loophole to avoid responsibility for the fact that probably the most evil public figure in America today is now President of the United States.
Get this through your thick skulls once and for all: No, liberals didn't put Trump in the white house; YOU DID.
Or does this whole "personal responsibility for one's choices and actions" only apply to liberals ?
Re: (Score:2)
Hey I just related the events as they happened and my thinking at the time. Nothing more than that.
I told you (and meant it) that I'd literally vote for the devil himself over Hillary Clinton. I'm fine with what it took to get those two SC justices appointed by a Republican and not a Democrat. If the left wanted her elected maybe they should have shown up in greater numbers. You really think he's the most evil public figure in America today? Wow, talk about setting the bar low. Trump is a clown and a con-ma
Re: (Score:2)
The Republicans had 12(?) different candidates, at least 9 of which had solid conservative credentials. And the dumbest of the bunch makes it through the primary? The reason as I understood it from some analysts is that Trump had a solid backing of die-hards from the start, maybe 20-30%, and the remaining votes when spread around never beat that number. Maybe if it was Jeb vs Trump on day one (and dumb brother Billy had mentioned the pussy thing earlier) it would have looked a lot different. I think a J
Re: (Score:3)
It's because there is no other option (Score:2, Interesting)
Nothing Trump can say or do will turn his followers away from him.
You do realize that is because people have literally been driven to Trump, even against their will in many cases, with no other options even remotely as good to choose from?
Even now the Democrats seem to promote a senile ancient white man who has been sewed in Washing corruption for 40 years, literally raping and pillaging as he went. THAT is supposed to be an alternative?
But it's supposed to be OK because he'll have a VP willing to overlook
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Funny you didn't think he went insane when he turned Rightist to run for the presidency, since before that he had been a card carrying democrat basically all his life.
Oh, you didn't know that ? I guess you didn't know either that the Clintons were his good friends for the longest time. He even got invited to their wedding.
That seems to be a common trait of Trump supporters: Ignorance. Ignorance of what kind of abomination Trump is, of all the pain and suffering he's caused, of all the small businesses he dr
Re: (Score:2)
I even heard someone suggest that you'd have to "nuke it from orbit, it's the only way to be sure". That's a bit excessive if you ask me.
Re: Bring on the Boogaloo (Score:2)
Fuck it, let's arm up and head in to certain death!
Re: (Score:3)
He? It was Ripley who first said it. Hicks agreed with Ripley and repeated what she said. Also, they did follow her advice, but she said that after a lot of people already died.
Vasquez: All right, we got seven canisters of CN-20. I say we roll them in there and nerve gas the whole fucking nest.
Hicks: That's worth a try, but we don't know if it's gonna affect them.
Hudson: Let's just bug out and call it even, OK? What are we even talking about this for?
Ripley: I say we take off and nuke the entire site from o
Re: (Score:2)
I presume CNN screaming it's a bad idea is somehow on par with the alleged president saying it was a good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump is going to get people killed. Go read Bruce Sterling's Distraction. One of the central points of the book was you didn't have to get your hands dirty if you wanted somebody dead, just put it out there on the net and let the crazies pick it up.
Yet many high profile annoying people exist. That theory doesn't hold up to the evidence. If you really want someone dead become a cop and then develop a pretext for shooting them. You may get fired but you'll most certainly get away with murder if your excuse is even half way valid. If you're concerned that plan has too much risk then join the FBI. The FBI has ruled literally every shooting as justified. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/0... [nytimes.com]
Trump isn't targeting anyone in particular, but he's saying things that he knows will incite violence when he in turn knows his position. It's much easier to radicalize somebody with minor mental issues these days thanks to how much media is out there (and how many echo chambers). And the problem isn't just the bomb throwers, they mostly blow themselves up or get caught by cops, the problem is that random crazy of Meal Team Six open carrying who panics and starts shoots. Or guys like these [nbcnews.com] Basically you gin folks up with violence tinged rhetoric for the sake of cheap political points. It works, Trump's poll numbers are rock solid. But then you've got the bodies to contend with.
This is at most a minor issue. I'll place a wager with you. I
Re: Facebook could watch for suddenly popular word (Score:2)