Comment by ok_dad
5 months ago
Don't do that, try and redirect the discussion using some dumb definition/semantics argument. This data is public data on posts that X locks behind a wall in order to force sign-ups and ad views. You and I both know the colloquial definition for "the people", it's literally the electorate of the state in question, in this case all the German citizens who are able to vote for the polticians who passed this public access law. This isn't the government trying to pry private company secrets from poor, downtrodden corporations, it's the government passing a law that public data from social media needs to be easy to access for researchers.
thank you
The more people that call out derail and divide attempts, the better this site gets.
> The more people that call out
People, in general, need to stop being such fucking wusses about calling out bad behavior, as proven in DC right now. Thanks for the support.
unfortunately this site is just as prone to thought bubbles, media bias, and disinformation campaigns, just like X...
It's data the user has agreed to share with the company at agreement with their terms. The data is not public if it is not made public. If it was, they wouldn't need to compel them to hand it over.
Who are the researchers and what thesis are they exploring?
Moreover. Companies operate by Charter, via the will of the people (and the people is you or us). And regardless of any agreements companies have with shareholders, first and foremost, you have a responsibility to the people you live and operate with, to act for the peoples interests, otherwise you don't have a right to exist, contrary to the lack of action in law on this.
A Charter is a grant, from the people, for any for-profit organization to exist, it comes with certain restrictions and it can be revoked at any time.
Charter
a written grant by a country's legislative or sovereign power [The People], by which a body such as a company, college, or city is founded and its rights and privileges defined.
YES! Corporations are FOR THE PEOPLE! Currently, the tail is wagging the dog.
As I said, the law is not being respected, but it doesn't invalidate the law.
I didn't see it as redirection.
Per @Qwertox who parented this thread with useful context, it doesn't sound like "open to all" access. That's material.
E: Here's the quote:
> This provision requires large online platforms to provide researchers with immediate access to publicly available data
> The GFF and Democracy Reporting International had argued that X had a duty under European law to provide easily researchable, collated access to information such as post reach, shares and likes - information theoretically available by laboriously clicking through thousands of posts but in practice impossible to access.
Read the last half of that. The court agrees.
> information theoretically available by laboriously clicking through thousands of posts
Did you intend to provide a different quote?
Subject to confirmation, "researcher" != "all of the people."
That was @atlantic's point.
2 replies →