Will Elon Musk’s Twitter 2.0 unmask anonymous Arab dissidents? | Technology News | Al Jazeera
<https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/3/will-elon-musks-twitter-2-0-unmask-a...> Twitter appears to be going private, leaving dissidents in the Middle East and North Africa concerned that a safe space to speak freely, amid various forms of state censorship, is about to disappear. Under the prospective ownership of Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the popular social media app is expected to undergo changes. But turning Twitter into a private venture with no oversight means some of these changes are bound to restrict the safety and privacy of users, effectively silencing them, activists and experts say. Along with making algorithms open-source and defeating the controversial issue of bots, the billionaire entrepreneur, who reached a buyout deal with Twitter Inc. last week, has also pledged to “authenticate all humans”. “No matter how you spin it, this will exclude certain users of the platform,” Jillian York, director for international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), told Al Jazeera. Many have questioned how the self-proclaimed “free-speech absolutist” plans to go about verifying the identity of human users and whether it would force anonymous users to reveal their real identities. If “authenticating all humans” includes de-anonymisation, it is “sure to have a profoundly negative impact on pro-democracy movements across the globe”, Kareem Rifai, a Syrian-American pro-democracy activist, told Al Jazeera. “De-anonymisation makes it dangerous or impossible for opposition activists living under dictatorial regimes to safely criticise their oppressors,” Rifai said. What does ‘authenticating all humans’ mean? Authenticating human users is a process that can be done in various ways. Wael Alalwani, a digital rights advocate and data scientist, explained it could range from “ticking a CAPTCHA box … all the way to uploading official documents and personal photos”. Regardless of how it’s done, both York and Alalwani agree there is “absolutely” cause for concern. While authentication was mentioned as a “solution” to the flourishing bots and spam presence on Twitter, Alalwani believes these “can’t be solved by authentication per se”. Combatting bots in a linear manner may lead to unintended consequences, that do not serve the long-term objective, he said, adding that Twitter users who tweet anonymously against repressive governments will be the first segment affected if they end up revealing their identity. York agrees. “A user who tweets anonymously against a repressive regime … would have to weigh their physical safety against the importance of their work – a choice they shouldn’t have to make,” she said. “I would like to see bots gone, as Musk said, but I’ll still not be happy if anonymous accounts were not allowed any more”, a Cairo-based Twitter user whose pseudonym is The Big Pharaoh, told Al Jazeera. The Big Pharaoh, who has been blogging anonymously since 2004, is known for their strong stance against the Egyptian government. They have nearly 75,000 Twitter followers. They say their anonymity stems from “security concerns”, but also because their blog – also The Big Pharaoh – has become synonymous with their pseudonym. Clamping down on dissent In their earlier days, platforms like Twitter and Facebook provided activists with the means to organise and amplify their demands, essentially becoming key tools that played a role in kickstarting some of the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011. In the few years leading up to the revolutions, dissenting voices who had been blogging anonymously since the early 2000s found a wider audience on Twitter as the platform’s popularity skyrocketed after 2008. In a political climate that did not allow independent media to thrive, local activists like The Big Pharaoh were finally able to offer an alternative view that resonated with millions of people. This was also the case for Mahmoud Salem, an Egyptian cybersecurity analyst who authored the blog Rantings of a Sandmonkey. In 2005, Salem started blogging anonymously in a bid to fuel debate on social and political issues at home and in the region. He later turned to Twitter and now shares his thoughts with more than 176,000 followers. Salem says it was “super important” to be able to tweet anonymously in the lead up to the Egyptian uprising, especially in terms of “not confusing the message with the messenger”. Tweeting anonymously, he explained, meant that you were stripped of any labels or affiliations. Egypt Salem, eventually revealed his identity in February 2011, after he said he was almost killed by the police, who briefly detained him for participating in a protest in downtown Cairo. According to Salem, if Twitter decides to force users to relinquish personal information under Musk, it will be the “end of online anonymous activism”, suggesting that users may start to move elsewhere, with the encrypted messaging app Telegram being “the most obvious option”. Salem believes it may also be the end of “fake accounts, and by extension Twitter users’ growth”, casting doubt on whether the new feature will be implemented at all. The formerly anonymous activist now “sporadically” blogs using his real name, but no longer lives in Egypt. “It made sense to leave”, he said, after his friends and business partners all “ended up arrested or exiled”. In recent years, Egypt has launched an unprecedented crackdown on the media, imprisoning dozens and occasionally expelling foreign journalists. In 2019, it introduced tighter restrictions that allow the state to block websites and social media accounts for “fake news” or incitement. And just last week, in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad’s government violently repressed what began as a peaceful uprising in 2011, amendments were made to existing cybercrime laws that would imprison Syrians for up to 15 years for criticising the regime. ‘Protect the privacy of users’ Despite Twitter becoming a haven for hate speech and disinformation over the years, anonymous users have still been able to speak freely without fearing immediate reprisals. To better shield and support anonymous users, The Big Pharaoh said Twitter should continue to “protect the privacy of users”. Salem agreed. “If such a process exists, then there needs to be a mechanism that prevents Twitter from sharing said information,” he said. Otherwise, Twitter may be aiding regimes in extending their repressive practices to digital spaces, too. Alalwani warns that knowing the real identities of activists could “augment the mass-surveillance activities applied by governments with the support of the new Twitter”. While Twitter has historically handed user data to foreign governments in response to legal requests, it has done so carefully and, at times, “fought back when they deem such requests to be unjust”, York said. However, Musk has so far given no indication that he has a sense of the issue. In a tweet published on Tuesday, Musk says: “By ‘free speech’, I simply mean that which matches the law.” He continues: “I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect.” The statement alarmed activists, who cross the free speech boundary set by their respective governments and guarded by Musk, and indicates “their data could be easily shared with the government to enforce the law”, Alalwani said. Instead of the app being in the hands of a sole private owner with huge infamous influence, ways of “collective governance, co-ownership, and data ownership should be discussed”, he suggested.
Alberto, nexiane sono basito: a qualcuno risulta che sia mai stato possibile pubblicare su Twitter senza autenticazione?!? É molto interessante osservare - ancora una volta - come la più becera disinformazione sia in grado di apparire autorevole citando /a caso/ "activists and experts"; tra l'altro sono davvero curioso di leggere cosa /davvero/ avrebbe detto Jillian York della EFF (perché nel caso la EFF si sarebbe fatta /molto/ male da sola) Piccolo indizio per i meno avvezzi al trucchetto usato in questo tipo di narrativa: autenticazione /non/ significa identificazione Alberto Cammozzo via nexa <nexa@server-nexa.polito.it> writes:
<https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/3/will-elon-musks-twitter-2-0-unmask-a...>
Twitter appears to be going private,
Mumble mumble: perché fino a oggi cos'è stata?!? Non è /per caso/ che il lapsus freudiano è che Twitter verrà /privata/ dell'influenza governativa USA... o almeno questa potrebbe essere l'intenzione?
leaving dissidents in the Middle East and North Africa concerned that a safe space to speak freely, amid various forms of state censorship, is about to disappear.
Eggià peccato, per far contenti i dissidenti occidentali (?) tocca scontentare i dissidenti mediorientali e nordafricani, la cui identità è perfettamente nota a Twitter (e una discreta serie di agenzie di intelligence) ma viene gelosamente tenuta /riservata/ [...]
But turning Twitter into a private venture with no oversight
Significa che Twitter non rispetterà la legge oppure non rispetterà gli ordini del governo/congresso USA e della Commissione EU? [...]
Along with making algorithms open-source
ROTFL: algoritmi open-source è una perla [...]
Many have questioned how the self-proclaimed “free-speech absolutist” plans to go about verifying the identity of human users and whether it would force anonymous users to reveal their real identities.
...ma da quando in qua Internet è mai stata anonima?!? Ancora con 'sta favoletta? Se volete proteggere i dissidenti di ogni latitudine e longitudine date loro dei dispositivi con sistemi operativi affidabili e verificabili E una rete dove sia possibile connettersi in modo davvero anonimo (tipo GNUnet), /poi/ ne riparliamo.
If “authenticating all humans” includes de-anonymisation,
De-anonimizzare gli utenti Internet è quello che le agenzie di intelligence di mezzo mondo sanno fare benissimo, soprattutto se amiche di quella USA [...]
Authenticating human users is a process that can be done in various ways.
Bingo!... e non tutti questi metodi implicano la necessità che l'utente si /identifichi/.
Wael Alalwani, a digital rights advocate and data scientist, explained it could range from “ticking a CAPTCHA box
... dove sarà necessario individuare tutte le foto di "muschio bianco" (white Musk) :-D
… all the way to uploading official documents and personal photos”.
Oppure: «How messaging provides Anonymity» https://docs.gnunet.org/handbook/gnunet.html#How-messaging-provides-Anonymit... e «Egos»: https://docs.gnunet.org/handbook/gnunet.html#Egos [...]
Twitter users who tweet anonymously against repressive governments will be the first segment affected if they end up revealing their identity.
Aridaje con la confusione tra autenticazione (che già c'è in Twitter) e identificazione [...]
Tweeting anonymously,
non è /mai/ stato possibile, semmai con pseudonimo (come nell'articolo si /accenna/)... banalmente identificabile dall'ultimo dei cretini con sufficiente autorità [...]
users may start to move elsewhere, with the encrypted messaging app Telegram being “the most obvious option”.
altra boiata galattica, visto che le chat di gruppo e i supergruppi su Telegram /non/ possono essere crittografati... e anche i messaggi uno a uno crittografati /non/ sono leggibili su altri device, quindi è una /mezza/ funzione. [...]
In 2019, it
l'Egitto
introduced tighter restrictions that allow the state to block websites and social media accounts for “fake news” or incitement.
mumble, mumble, mumble: dove l'ho vista applicata la stessa cosa?!?... mmmmmmmh [...]
Despite Twitter becoming a haven for hate speech and disinformation over the years, anonymous users have still been able to speak freely without fearing immediate reprisals.
finché Twitter glielo ha permesso, perché ci sono dissidenti e dissidenti, neh?!?
To better shield and support anonymous users, The Big Pharaoh said Twitter should continue to “protect the privacy of users”.
ROFTL [...]
Alalwani warns that knowing the real identities of activists could “augment the mass-surveillance activities applied by governments with the support of the new Twitter”.
Ma una dichiarazioncina di Snowden o Assange non ci starebbe troppo bene?!? [...]
Instead of the app being in the hands of a sole private owner with huge infamous influence, ways of “collective governance, co-ownership, and data ownership should be discussed”, he suggested.
Notare lo sforzo immane che devono fare pur di non chiedere manco per sbaglio che il software sia libero :-O Saluti, 380° -- 380° (Giovanni Biscuolo public alter ego) «Noi, incompetenti come siamo, non abbiamo alcun titolo per suggerire alcunché» Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>.
Caro Giovanni, On 04/05/22 20:44, 380° wrote: [...]
<https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/3/will-elon-musks-twitter-2-0-unmask-a...>
Twitter appears to be going private, Mumble mumble: perché fino a oggi cos'è stata?!? Non è /per caso/ che il lapsus freudiano è che Twitter verrà /privata/ dell'influenza governativa USA... o almeno questa potrebbe essere l'intenzione?
scusa, ho letto ora la tua risposta. Solo una precisazione che può essere utile anche in futuro, visto che la differenza di terminologia tra italiano e inglese è ingannevole: in ambiente anglosassone "private company" indica una compagnia non quotata in borsa. Con "going private" si suggerisce che mentre oggi Twitter è una public company quotata, pare che EM voglia comprarsela tutta. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privately_held_company> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_company> Nel merito, va precisato che "authenticating all real humans" non lo ha detto l'articolista, ma Musk in uno dei suoi tweet oracolari. La congettura più citata è che si riferisse all'estensione del "blue checkmark" degli utenti verificati, cioè che hanno fornito un documento di identità (nella terminologia di Twitter: "/authentic/ users" <https://help.twitter.com/en/managing-your-account/about-twitter-verified-acc...>). Il che, come suggeriva l'articolo, fa pensare maggiore capacità di censurare i contenuti e ad una forma singolare di "free speech", ben illuminata dal successivo tweet: /"going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people",/ senza distinguere quale /law/, quale /people/./ / Al proposito non mi pare irrilevante che ad acquistare Twitter con Musk saranno i partner sauditi: <https://www.forbes.com/sites/timbajarin/2022/05/09/elon-musks-twitter-strate...>. ciao, Alberto
Ciao Alberto Alberto Cammozzo <ac+nexa@zeromx.net> writes: [...]
Twitter appears to be going private, Mumble mumble: perché fino a oggi cos'è stata?!? Non è /per caso/ che il lapsus freudiano è che Twitter verrà /privata/ dell'influenza governativa USA... o almeno questa potrebbe essere l'intenzione?
scusa, ho letto ora la tua risposta.
ci mancherebbe, anzi grazie del riscontro perché...
Solo una precisazione che può essere utile anche in futuro, visto che la differenza di terminologia tra italiano e inglese è ingannevole: in ambiente anglosassone "private company" indica una compagnia non quotata in borsa.
urca che ignoranza, scusa; effettivamente mi sono lost in traslation [...]
Nel merito, va precisato che "authenticating all real humans" non lo ha detto l'articolista, ma Musk in uno dei suoi tweet oracolari.
sì lo so, è divertentissimo osservare i fabbricatori di notizie (giornalisti) si cimentino in tentativi di esegesi di simili... boutade
La congettura più citata
ok, si tratta pur sempre di congetture... dopotutto anche /ieri/ potevamo solo congetturare su quali criteri hanno utilizzato per decidere censurare certi post o interi profili viviamo di congetture :-D [...]
Al proposito non mi pare irrilevante che ad acquistare Twitter con Musk saranno i partner sauditi: <https://www.forbes.com/sites/timbajarin/2022/05/09/elon-musks-twitter-strate...>.
si vede che probabilmente hanno deciso di estendere i 15 eyes a 16, 17, 18... amici, degli amici, per evitare che vadano coi nemici continuo a rimanere esterrefatto delle reazioni dell'acquisto di Musk, evidentemente anche tra i ricchi sfondati ed eccentrici ci sono persone più uguali di altre. Ciao, 380° -- 380° (Giovanni Biscuolo public alter ego) «Noi, incompetenti come siamo, non abbiamo alcun titolo per suggerire alcunché» Disinformation flourishes because many people care deeply about injustice but very few check the facts. Ask me about <https://stallmansupport.org>.
participants (2)
-
380° -
Alberto Cammozzo