Social media is it Toxic Bubble...

@Whiskybreath
They 'text' (verb) each other: "Wassup, dude?"; "Zilch, man. Your end?" "Nuffin, bro. See EastEnders last night?" "Yeah. Awesome, dude". "Laters". They do this to each of their internet 'friends' and it takes a full day each time, every day.

Quite.
I took a coffee & sarnie into son's room last Escape from Catterick weekend, to be greeted with
" Man....CHECK YOU OUT"

My reply?
I'm "Dad",..nor am I a pint of milk at Tesco.
He's 28 for Christ's sake.
I think he got the message.
We do notice he goes through a few days of communicative detox to be fair.

 

I deleted my FB account a few years ago when I started looking for a new job. I didn't want potential employers seeing what a lazy, sarcastic, possibly right wing bastard I was.

A few weeks later at a social gathering, two of our friends (married to each other) seemed to be giving me the cold shoulder. I didn't worry too much as they can be right mardy buggers when they want to be.

After we left the party, another friend asked them what their problem was as they'd noticed them being off with me.
The answer was "we're not happy because Miner has deleted Sarah as his friend on FB".
Obviously I'd deleted her, I'd deleted my bloody account. I didn't realise it was now social etiquette to inform every buger that I was no longer on FB.

This being the wife that although is on FB, and friends with loads of people, she never posts,likes, comments on ANYTHING! Bloody stalker.

 

Facebook is shiite. Don`t do it folks.

 

An interesting interjection from the reviewer of CT Legislation.

Theresa May’s terror plans condemned

The political comment is here:

But there is also a very interesting insight here:

The statute book is cluttered with CT offences around potential social media issues.

"Normal crime" also has plenty of offences to catch most behaviour (though I admit the computer misuse act is a bit dated).

Sadly, the Prime Minister may need to re-show her homework as to why she needs to create new offences. I get that it is the easiest thing for a politician to do; Blair did it with glorification of terrorism offences in 2006, but prosecutions are difficult.

Best use the laws we have rather than engage in political displacement activity - I respectfully suggest.

 

The full text of Max Hill QC's comments to an academic conference on social media.

Responding to Terrorists' Use of Social Media: Legislation, Investigation and Prosecution - VOX - Pol

I take from it the vital nature of communications schedules to courts, the importance of not alienating Social Media companies and most interestingly:

Now, therein lies the issue.

I have seen very good training, and I have seen some training that belongs in the Science Museum - but the internet is an inherently agile enviroment, more agile than a bureaucracy (which is what law enforcement is).

Creating law enforcement, intelligence and court systems agile enough to deal with the threat in a proportionate way will have to move beyond the political nonsense of either the "find evidence" or "turn the internet off" buttons which people seem to advocate.

 

A useful listen to the policy level discussions going on.

Technology Against Terrorism: How to Respond to the Exploitation of the Internet

 

My MoT man had exactly the same experience.
Instead of asking why they had been deleted they took the huff.
John decided he had made the right decision if they are that sad.

 

YouTube to redirect searches for IS videos - BBC News

Now here is search engine optimisation taken to a further level.

Just imagine; no one could disagree that re-direction of people searching for violent extremist islamist narrative to counter-narrative material is a bad thing.

But an immediate question that occurs, is what is being deployed against other points of view?

And is it being deployed by accountable state agencies, or private companies, or non-state actors.

(Like a chap sitting in his PJ's getting smashed. Professionals stick to Earl Grey).

 

An interesting academic article, giving a whistle stop tour of DAESH on-line activities.

Cracks in the Online “Caliphate”: How the Islamic State is Losing Ground in the Battle for Cyberspace | Lakomy | Perspectives on Terrorism

Arguing that the success and development of the on-line Caliphate is linked to both on- and off-line activities, it seems that there is a critical decision point at the moment.

With the physical loss of territory, the potential for propaganda to reinforce that the Caliphate is a nice place to live is diminishing. The propaganda stressing the competent governance of the Caliphate was always much more in volume, and I would assert more compelling than the atrocity footage that the media concentrate on. People needed to believe that the Caliphate really was the land where Islam would be instituted "properly" (of course there is always a vengeful and probably unhinged lot that need to see people murdered, it makes them feel a bit better that their team will win).

Linked to the physical loss of territory, there is also the continued attrition of skilled DAESH personnel who actually can make an distribute all this material.

The combination of the loss of topics to talk about, and the people to make it convincing offer quite an opportunity to further degrade the appeal of DAESH. Linked to active techniques like redirection of search terms, and counter-messaging; this could be an effective strategy.

Or we could just continue to play wack-a-mole, and boast about 38,889 take-down (whether that is unenforceable notices served or actual material deleted from servers, I am not sure anyone knows) like Mrs May does after every terrorist attack.

(It is a bit like when I read about the body count in Viet Nam, and US commanders being told they should have already won the war with the amount of enemy they had killed - several thousand takedowns, and still successful attacks by radicalised individuals).

Online radicalisation - GOV.UK

Because we all trust Police crime figures, don't we........

 

I have a dummy Faceache account linked through to a rubbish email address solely for the purpose of accessing certain industry related Facebook pages. It essentially says sod off.

And an infeasible number of people want to be by friend

 

Co.ck sucker. Mother f.u.ck.er

Just testing the water

How many triangles can you see? | Daily Mail Online

 

Are they hot, and Russian by any chance?

 

Meanwhile the Home Secretary finds time in her busy schedule to lecture people.

UK urges tech giants to do more to prevent spread of extremism

Quite how much attention anyone is going to pay when she cannot connect the dots is beyond me.

Crime rise is biggest in a decade, ONS figures show

I love the photo in the article, it is like a caption contest.

Rudd: "What have i told you about letting your cops go out and turn people over? It ****s up my stats.

Random Boss out for Promotion: "Yes, Ma'am. Sorry, Ma'am".

 

It gets better

Terrorists are only real beneficiaries of WhatsApp end-to-end encryption, Amber Rudd suggests

Bet the MP's who were using Whatsapp to discuss Mrs May's future the morning after the election did?

WhatsApp: the go-to messaging tool for parliamentary plotting

This is another of those, "I need it you don't" politician things.

You can take my privacy tools from my my cold dead hand.

Movies GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY

 

My, seems even the NHS are getting worried about social media.

Beware of social media during terror events, NHS guidelines warn - BBC News

It even warns about journo's.

Mind you, if you put it on Facetube it stops the papers having to hack your phone?