No, I definitely did not.
I said it wasn't an accurate comparison.
circuscritic
joined 1 year ago
I'm going to need you to actually quote which part of my comment you're responding to.
As far as I can tell, what you wrote has exactly nothing to do with anything that I said.
At no point did I mention laws, or legal loopholes.
And I certainly never mentioned anything about the United States, or the legal liability of Twitter, except as in response to your comment.
I think you're confusing my acknowledgment of the daily reality of a country that is currently divided between 3 and 5 major and minor factions, all in various states of civil conflict, with being something else entirely.
I wasn't providing any opinion, or analysis, on the legality from Twitter's perspective. I certainly wasn't making any comparisons to laws in the United States and Yemen, or anything else that you've been talking about since your first comment.
I would make the "duh no shit this is clickbait" observation if the BBC ran yet another story about how kids are selling drugs on Snapchat or Instagram.
You mean the first three paragraphs describing a few ads on Twitter for weapons?
Followed by the BBC, quoting other British "NGO" organizations, trying to rally people to support additional actions against a group that Britain currently engaged in military actions against? Yes, I read that as well.
The article reads like two separate articles pasted together by a moron. The only connective tissue between the Twitter ads, and the Houthis, was that the weapons traders lived an area controlled by them. News flash, the Houthis control a majority of the country.
So again, in a country that has had an active civil war since 2014, it's not surprising that people are selling weapons anywhere and everywhere, online, and off.
Why are you assuming that there is a state of law and order to any degree, outside of maybe the capital..?
Are you aware that we're talking about Yemen...?
Notice that Wikipedia page for their civil war doesn't currently have an end date i.e. it's still active...
It's not like Twitter is providing up support for these transactions, I'm saying it's not surprising they exist on a public forum like Twitter for a country that's ravaged by a decade war and famine.
Just like how kids in the United States sell drugs on Twitter or Instagram.
So no, Twitter is not automatically liable just because people are abusing the platform. I'm not saying it can't get there, just that it's not that simple.
Regardless, I wasn't saying anything about the legality of it for Twitter.
Do you have a working GUI OneDrive Linux client?