It won’t, because the smart voting app was not blocked in eu. The markets where these kinda app would be needed are also the ones where sideloading will likely not arrive.
It’s funny how people in this thread are so adamant you should just “not take the bait” when the entire words has been redefined to mean something completely different by these tactics. For example: woke.
Companies know that people think like this nowadays, so they only require the phone number after you are already invested into the service. Twitter had this where they would allow you to not set phone initially, but then ban you some time later and require it to lift the ban. Microsoft also bans you for “suspicious activity” and the only way to unlock account is to “verify” your number. You can only contact them about it via another ms account or… by phone. Fuck everything about this tbh.
For everyone to know, Instagram does this too in a way. They would let me sign up with just an email, verify it, then at first login auto ban me. Giving me the option of appealing and tracking said appeal by giving them a phone number.
The only way I could resolve it was by using a phone number. Meanwhile they've harvested 2-3 of my anon and temp emails.
I think it’s effective because the message is simple and scaled in coordinated fashion. To effectively answer to such an attack you need to massively distribute among the users refutals to every part of the attack message, with reputable sources and it needs to be brief enough so people don’t lose interest halfway. It could take a form of browser extension or a separate site with a dialogue tree of sorts where one participant is propaganda bot and the other the site user. Then users need to publicly post these (i guess you can ask fellas for help?).
You can just generate a bunch of legit looking news sites and spam it on facebook/whatever. Most people won’t check and it’s not viable for facebook to track every fake news site.
I also didn’t know about this. There’s a problem with features like these - casual user doesn’t even realize it exists, but motivated actors can easily exploit it to correct the conversation.
`flag` is visible on the submission list pages underneath the submission title. It's not hidden in any way. Next to it is also `hide` which is what most people should use for content they're not interested in but that may be appropriate for the site overall. `hide` is also not hidden.
> The basic algorithm divides points by a power of the time since a story was submitted. Comments in threads are ranked the same way.
> Other factors affecting rank include user flags, anti-abuse software, software which demotes overheated discussions, account or site weighting, and moderator action.
To be fair, "flag" is short for "flag for review for removal by moderators", and has been for decades on internet forums. Making flags also downvote is counterintuitive, to say the least.
And people don't usually read the FAQ to double-check that basic forum features work in the intuitive way. :)
Why do you think people who pay money to create accounts to push their agenda will stop doing it when you tell them to cut the middleman? I bet the platform will just be 100% occupied by bots.
I'm assuming that the zero-cost (thus no barrier to entry) is part of the problem now. If everyone had to pay you would, at the very least, see a lot less bots and so no "chorus".
I disagree. From what I can see the problem is that people are receptive to propaganda on the internet, and you can’t really solve this. As long as this is the case, there will be people who can benefit from shifting public perception, and then it becomes merely a question of resources.
