Euro 2020: Italy win it; morons, encouraged by UK govt., racially abuse England's greatest team since '66.

[Moggy]

I do think social media should have some form of ID varification. I suppose I'd equate it to something like having a phone line installed in your house, it would be very difficult to make completely untraced racist phone calls in the UK for example as it is all traceable.

It doesn't need to spell the end for Internet anonymity, just for the major sites like Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram etc. The ones that have a real monopoly on the market.

I think that would stop a lot of racist abuse, and any that persist would be traceable.

The players unions should really organise a proper boycott and threaten to set up their own FA/UEFA/FIFA site/app for players to speak directly to fans. Twitter in particular fail to act over and over and it seems to be getting worse and not better.

We should destroy the right of anonymity for gay, trans, victims of domestic abuse and those living under tyrannical regimes, plus all the people that don't have/can't afford ID to catch a few racists?

Billions of people left without a voice, just to catch people that (as we've seen) use their real names and put their employer in their bio?

Great plan.

Twitter and social media is currently a very unsafe place for black, trans, gay, domestic abuse victims and those under tyrannical regimes. This isn't about getting rid of a safe space, that safe space does not exist at present at all.

But sure, let's all let twitter get away with allowing racist, homophobic and mysogynist content. Them big corpos need all the protection.

And how many black, gay, trans domestic abuse victims and those under tyrannical regimes have you spoken to?

Nobody is saying social media (Facebook is a MUCH bigger problem than Twitter btw) companies should get away with anything. Nobody is wanting to protect big corps.

But the idea of kicking billions of people off the biggest websites? It's nonsense.

[captain red dog]

I do think social media should have some form of ID varification. I suppose I'd equate it to something like having a phone line installed in your house, it would be very difficult to make completely untraced racist phone calls in the UK for example as it is all traceable.

It doesn't need to spell the end for Internet anonymity, just for the major sites like Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram etc. The ones that have a real monopoly on the market.

I think that would stop a lot of racist abuse, and any that persist would be traceable.

The players unions should really organise a proper boycott and threaten to set up their own FA/UEFA/FIFA site/app for players to speak directly to fans. Twitter in particular fail to act over and over and it seems to be getting worse and not better.

We should destroy the right of anonymity for gay, trans, victims of domestic abuse and those living under tyrannical regimes, plus all the people that don't have/can't afford ID to catch a few racists?

Billions of people left without a voice, just to catch people that (as we've seen) use their real names and put their employer in their bio?

Great plan.

Twitter and social media is currently a very unsafe place for black, trans, gay, domestic abuse victims and those under tyrannical regimes. This isn't about getting rid of a safe space, that safe space does not exist at present at all.

But sure, let's all let twitter get away with allowing racist, homophobic and mysogynist content. Them big corpos need all the protection.

And how many black, gay, trans domestic abuse victims and those under tyrannical regimes have you spoken to?

Nobody is saying social media (Facebook is a MUCH bigger problem than Twitter btw) companies should get away with anything. Nobody is wanting to protect big corps.

But the idea of kicking billions of people off the biggest websites? It's nonsense.

I'm not suggesting anyone gets kicked off or is forced to publicly show their name.

But either the big companies get a grip on it, or it will need some kind of varification system. There are free ways to varify your identity online, the discussion around who should control that, what ways are acceptable is there to be had.

This isn't voter ID. This is private companies who are making obscene amounts of money whilst doing nothing to protect people.

[Moggy]

I do think social media should have some form of ID varification. I suppose I'd equate it to something like having a phone line installed in your house, it would be very difficult to make completely untraced racist phone calls in the UK for example as it is all traceable.

It doesn't need to spell the end for Internet anonymity, just for the major sites like Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram etc. The ones that have a real monopoly on the market.

I think that would stop a lot of racist abuse, and any that persist would be traceable.

The players unions should really organise a proper boycott and threaten to set up their own FA/UEFA/FIFA site/app for players to speak directly to fans. Twitter in particular fail to act over and over and it seems to be getting worse and not better.

We should destroy the right of anonymity for gay, trans, victims of domestic abuse and those living under tyrannical regimes, plus all the people that don't have/can't afford ID to catch a few racists?

Billions of people left without a voice, just to catch people that (as we've seen) use their real names and put their employer in their bio?

Great plan.

Twitter and social media is currently a very unsafe place for black, trans, gay, domestic abuse victims and those under tyrannical regimes. This isn't about getting rid of a safe space, that safe space does not exist at present at all.

But sure, let's all let twitter get away with allowing racist, homophobic and mysogynist content. Them big corpos need all the protection.

And how many black, gay, trans domestic abuse victims and those under tyrannical regimes have you spoken to?

Nobody is saying social media (Facebook is a MUCH bigger problem than Twitter btw) companies should get away with anything. Nobody is wanting to protect big corps.

But the idea of kicking billions of people off the biggest websites? It's nonsense.

I'm not suggesting anyone gets kicked off or is forced to publicly show their name.

But either the big companies get a grip on it, or it will need some kind of varification system. There are free ways to varify your identity online, the discussion around who should control that, what ways are acceptable is there to be had.

This isn't voter ID. This is private companies who are making obscene amounts of money whilst doing nothing to protect people.

As soon as the companies have the IDs, they'll be selling them. Countries will pass laws to force access to them. Hackers will be leaking them.

Free ID? Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think there are any that don't involve documents (passport etc) or credit cards.

It's a terrible idea. It's using a nuclear bomb to crack a nut.

I agree tech companies can do more and they should do more. But the solution isn't to remove billions of people from participating in the internet.

[Dual]

If YouTube algorithms can detect an unlicensed music track in an uploaded video why can't twitter detect and act upon racism?

[Moggy]

If YouTube algorithms can detect an unlicensed music track in an uploaded video why can't twitter detect and act upon racism?

Because the music track is a music track. Whereas racism can be hidden.

I'm sure Twitter algorithms can pick up on the N word. But all of its variations? Are we going to ban Snoop Dogg? Can it pick up on n****r, ni***r, n*g**r etc etc? What if somebody posts it in an image? Can the algorithm pick up on an acrostic?

And that's a very obvious racist word. There's a lot of ways of being racist without being overly obvious about it.

[Dual]

If YouTube algorithms can detect an unlicensed music track in an uploaded video why can't twitter detect and act upon racism?

Because the music track is a music track. Whereas racism can be hidden.

I'm sure Twitter algorithms can pick up on the N word. But all of its variations? Are we going to ban Snoop Dogg? Can it pick up on n****r, ni***r, n*g**r etc etc? What if somebody posts it in an image? Can the algorithm pick up on an acrostic?

And that's a very obvious racist word. There's a lot of ways of being racist without being overly obvious about it.

I think they can but just don't want to.

[Moggy]

If YouTube algorithms can detect an unlicensed music track in an uploaded video why can't twitter detect and act upon racism?

Because the music track is a music track. Whereas racism can be hidden.

I'm sure Twitter algorithms can pick up on the N word. But all of its variations? Are we going to ban Snoop Dogg? Can it pick up on n****r, ni***r, n*g**r etc etc? What if somebody posts it in an image? Can the algorithm pick up on an acrostic?

And that's a very obvious racist word. There's a lot of ways of being racist without being overly obvious about it.

I think they can but just don't want to.

How?

[Rocsteady]

A two tier system could work - twitter where you need to use your real name, and an anon Twitter where it works much like now. You can switch between the two at will.

Would allow Rashford etc to broadcast while minimising the amount of racist abuse visible.

[Moggy]

A two tier system could work - twitter where you need to use your real name, and an anon Twitter where it works much like now. You can switch between the two at will.

Would allow Rashford etc to broadcast while minimising the amount of racist abuse visible.

It wouldn't stop people like Andy Bone.

[Qikz]

A two tier system could work - twitter where you need to use your real name, and an anon Twitter where it works much like now. You can switch between the two at will.

Would allow Rashford etc to broadcast while minimising the amount of racist abuse visible.

It wouldn't stop people like Andy Bone.

Also if facebook proves anything even using their real name dumb racist idiots will share their vitrol online. What needs to happen is those people need to see consequences for their actions, you can have that regardless of anonymity or not.

[Moggy]

A two tier system could work - twitter where you need to use your real name, and an anon Twitter where it works much like now. You can switch between the two at will.

Would allow Rashford etc to broadcast while minimising the amount of racist abuse visible.

It wouldn't stop people like Andy Bone.

Also if facebook proves anything even using their real name dumb racist idiots will share their vitrol online. What needs to happen is those people need to see consequences for their actions, you can have that regardless of anonymity or not.

Yep.

There is a relatively simple solution where the social media companies act swiftly to delete offending posts, ban offending accounts and report racism to the authorities. It won't end it, but would help.

[OrangeRKN]

What twitter and other social media platforms need is a lot more moderation. Look at your average functioning forum and the ratio of moderators to users. Social media has far, far fewer moderators per user, but rather than hire more and support them better the social media companies want to find cheaper technological "solutions" that don't exist - hand-written algorithms can't cover the complexity required, AI is too nascent and opaque in how it works.

An idea I would explore is having businesses pay for their social media accounts and earmark that money for moderation. If companies are going to use social media for marketing and PR they can help fund the moderation they are then relying on. That could be tied in to how a business account becomes "verified".

It's a bit weird though to be arguing "how can paying for more moderation stay profitable" when twitter I'm pretty sure is just a hole for investor money anyway.

[Moggy]

twitter.com/BenHCarrington/status/1415266251748921346

[Herdanos]

Look at your average functioning forum

Gonna need some signposting here ORKN

[Moggy]

twitter.com/henrywinter/status/1415240318610444300

I've just seen the messages that Portsmouth's under 18s were sending.

strawberry floating hell.

[SEP]

If YouTube algorithms can detect an unlicensed music track in an uploaded video why can't twitter detect and act upon racism?

Because the music track is a music track. Whereas racism can be hidden.

I'm sure Twitter algorithms can pick up on the N word. But all of its variations? Are we going to ban Snoop Dogg? Can it pick up on n****r, ni***r, n*g**r etc etc? What if somebody posts it in an image? Can the algorithm pick up on an acrostic?

And that's a very obvious racist word. There's a lot of ways of being racist without being overly obvious about it.

I think they can but just don't want to.

Ever heard of the Scunthorpe problem?

[Rex Kramer]

twitter.com/henrywinter/status/1415240318610444300

I've just seen the messages that Portsmouth's under 18s were sending.

strawberry floating hell.

strawberry floating hell. I though that kind of bollocks died out in the 70s/early 80s but these are kids.

[Moggy]

twitter.com/henrywinter/status/1415240318610444300

I've just seen the messages that Portsmouth's under 18s were sending.

strawberry floating hell.

strawberry floating hell. I though that kind of bollocks died out in the 70s/early 80s but these are kids.

It's unbelievable that youngsters would be involved.

It's not particularly shocking when a 50 year old twat says it. But under 18s? I can understand there being one little banana split, but it's a whole group chat, they obviously had no fear that anybody in that group would be against their vile bullshit.

[Drumstick]

So what are they saying?

[Moggy]

So what are they saying?

I'm not posting it here. It's easy enough to find on Twitter if you search for "Portsmouth academy".