You are assuming social media wants to get rid of these influence operations. Not only do they not want powerful enemies in the case of many of them, they do not want the decrease in traffic. Inauthentic behavior is like over half of everything.
Only the ones they cannot ignore that are disfavored will get canceled at all. In fact they could notice influence operations are targeting you, a real user with mass flagging, and they would be more likely to violate you than that influence operation depending on whom it was.
Nothing porksnort said implied social media wanted total elimination of the bot networks. The methods listed are accurate ways they will stop unwanted traffic.
Like half the population of this site exists because Reddit locked down their API. It’s an empirical fact that they engage in bot detection and prevention. Anyone who consistently uses a VPN will have personal experience with it. Anyone who’s tried to interact with a social media’s API can tell you that. Try to write a bot that scrapes Facebook events or LinkedIn profiles before you speak in such absolutes.
You are correct that they don’t aim to completely eliminate them. They might even explicitly allow some of them. But If they didn’t engage in any bot management you’d see nothing but spam for “hot 21yos in your area” on every site. Depending on the platform they might offer paid API access to facilitate those influence networks (eg X.com blue checks). Even if they did that they’d engage in bot prevention for bots that aren’t paying.
Connected influence ops are given free reign, absolutely. Big money to polits.
If I can spot them they can, and they choose not to shut them down, even as those ops abuse actual people in bullying them away from reality and use the system to get the real users violated, mass flagging and whatnot.
You are writing like they’re involved in good faith efforts to stop inauthentic behavior and that is just laughable. Completely false as well.
Connected influence ops are given free reign, absolutely. Big money to polits.
If I can spot them they can, and they choose not to shut them down, even as those ops abuse actual people in bullying them away from reality and use the system to get the real users violated, mass flagging and whatnot.
You are writing like they’re involved in good faith efforts to stop inauthentic behavior and that is just laughable. Completely false as well.
Connected influence ops are given free reign, absolutely. Big money to polits.
If I can spot them they can, and they choose not to shut them down, even as those ops abuse actual people in bullying them away from reality and use the system to get the real users violated, mass flagging and whatnot.
You are writing like they’re involved in good faith efforts to stop inauthentic behavior and that is just laughable. Completely false as well.
I’m not assuming any of that. The social media companies do monitor for bots and influence operations. Just because they let some keep operating doesn’t change the technical reason for using actual phones vs emulators.
Seeing as I without any tools or information in able to spot influence operations left and right operating in Broad daylight, often in arrogant impunity of the actual rules and abusing real users trying to stand up for reality, I know the social media companies with all of their tools and all the data can see these influence operations.
Any they remove or restrict would be the exception not the rule. As I said, why would they? It makes their advertising more valuable, all of society is based on lies at this point. Nothing matters outside of their own self-advancement. No matter the harm that results. Millions of people going to be thrown into concentration camps and exterminated? Tough shit. Apparently.
You are assuming social media wants to get rid of these influence operations. Not only do they not want powerful enemies in the case of many of them, they do not want the decrease in traffic. Inauthentic behavior is like over half of everything.
Only the ones they cannot ignore that are disfavored will get canceled at all. In fact they could notice influence operations are targeting you, a real user with mass flagging, and they would be more likely to violate you than that influence operation depending on whom it was.
Nothing porksnort said implied social media wanted total elimination of the bot networks. The methods listed are accurate ways they will stop unwanted traffic.
Social media has no incentive to get rid of the networks or slow them down. And they do not.
Like half the population of this site exists because Reddit locked down their API. It’s an empirical fact that they engage in bot detection and prevention. Anyone who consistently uses a VPN will have personal experience with it. Anyone who’s tried to interact with a social media’s API can tell you that. Try to write a bot that scrapes Facebook events or LinkedIn profiles before you speak in such absolutes.
You are correct that they don’t aim to completely eliminate them. They might even explicitly allow some of them. But If they didn’t engage in any bot management you’d see nothing but spam for “hot 21yos in your area” on every site. Depending on the platform they might offer paid API access to facilitate those influence networks (eg X.com blue checks). Even if they did that they’d engage in bot prevention for bots that aren’t paying.
Connected influence ops are given free reign, absolutely. Big money to polits.
If I can spot them they can, and they choose not to shut them down, even as those ops abuse actual people in bullying them away from reality and use the system to get the real users violated, mass flagging and whatnot.
You are writing like they’re involved in good faith efforts to stop inauthentic behavior and that is just laughable. Completely false as well.
Connected influence ops are given free reign, absolutely. Big money to polits.
If I can spot them they can, and they choose not to shut them down, even as those ops abuse actual people in bullying them away from reality and use the system to get the real users violated, mass flagging and whatnot.
You are writing like they’re involved in good faith efforts to stop inauthentic behavior and that is just laughable. Completely false as well.
Connected influence ops are given free reign, absolutely. Big money to polits.
If I can spot them they can, and they choose not to shut them down, even as those ops abuse actual people in bullying them away from reality and use the system to get the real users violated, mass flagging and whatnot.
You are writing like they’re involved in good faith efforts to stop inauthentic behavior and that is just laughable. Completely false as well.
Yeah they absolutely have a motive to get rid of some kinds of bots: spam
I’m not assuming any of that. The social media companies do monitor for bots and influence operations. Just because they let some keep operating doesn’t change the technical reason for using actual phones vs emulators.
It is both cat and mouse AND kabuki theater.
Seeing as I without any tools or information in able to spot influence operations left and right operating in Broad daylight, often in arrogant impunity of the actual rules and abusing real users trying to stand up for reality, I know the social media companies with all of their tools and all the data can see these influence operations.
Any they remove or restrict would be the exception not the rule. As I said, why would they? It makes their advertising more valuable, all of society is based on lies at this point. Nothing matters outside of their own self-advancement. No matter the harm that results. Millions of people going to be thrown into concentration camps and exterminated? Tough shit. Apparently.