The social media platform Discord recently published its quarterly safety report which notes that some 55,573,411 accounts and 68,379 servers were "disabled" between January and June, 2022. From a report: According to the company, the vast majority of these were taken offline for "spam or spam-related offenses." The number of accounts that were disabled for reasons other than spam definitely pales in comparison, amounting to a mere 1,821,721. The bans in this category were mostly handed out for issues relating to "child safety" or "exploitative and unsolicited content." Discord seems to be justified in disabling these accounts and closing the affected servers, at least broadly speaking. Successful appeals came to only two percent in the first quarter and less than one percent in the second quarter of this year, meaning that of the 235,945 users who called for a second opinion about their ban, only 3,098 of them were reinstated on the platform.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: The Republican National Committee (RNC) filed a lawsuit against Alphabet's Google on Friday for allegedly sending its emails to users' spam folders. The U.S. political committee accuses the tech giant of "discriminating" against it by "throttling its email messages because of the RNC's political affiliation and views," according to a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in California. "Google has relegated millions of RNC emails en masse to potential donors' and supporters' spam folders during pivotal points in election fundraising and community building," the RNC said in the lawsuit. Google rejected the claims.

Spam filters on email services typically weed out unsolicited "spam" messages and divert them to a separate folder. The RNC said that for most of the month, nearly all of its emails end up in users' inboxes but at the end of the month, which is an important time for fund-raising, nearly all of their emails end up in spam folders. "Critically, and suspiciously, this end of the month period is historically when the RNC's fundraising is most successful," the lawsuit said, adding that it does not matter whether the email is about donating, voting or community outreach. The committee said the "discrimination" had been going on for about 10 months despite its best efforts to work with Google. It said the alleged routing of its emails to spam folders had eaten up revenue and that more money would be lost in coming weeks as midterm elections loom. "As we have repeatedly said, we simply don't filter emails based on political affiliation. Gmail's spam filters reflect users' actions," Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda said in a statement. "We provide training and guidelines to campaigns, we recently launched an FEC-approved pilot for political senders, and we continue to work to maximize email deliverability while minimizing unwanted spam," he said, referring to the Federal Election Commission.

Further reading: US Approves Google Plan To Let Political Emails Bypass Gmail Spam Filter

Firefox Relay, a Mozilla service designed to hide your "real" email address by giving you virtual ones to hand out, is expanding to offer virtual phone numbers. From a report: In a blog post Mozilla product manager Tony Amaral-Cinotto explains that the relay service generates a phone number for you to give out to companies if you suspect they might use it to send you spam messages in the future, or if you think they might share it with others who will. The idea is that handing out this alternative phone number makes it easier to block spam phone calls or texts in the future. You can either block all calls or texts sent to your relay number, or just block specific contacts. Importantly it lets you keep your "real" phone number private, which is something you might want to consider if it's a number you use to receive sensitive information like two-step verification codes via SMS. Once you've signed up, the Firefox phone number masking service offers 50 minutes of incoming calls and 75 text messages a month. The phone number masking service is also more expensive at $4.99 a month (or $3.99 a month when paid annually), while the email service offers a choice between a free tier and a premium tier costing $1.99 a month ($0.99 a month when paid annually).

As Meta makes deeper inroads with businesses on WhatsApp, its biggest bet to monetize the instant messaging app with over 2 billion users, we are getting an early glimpse at how user experience might change on the free app. It's not great. From a report: Scores of people in India, WhatsApp's largest market by users with over 500 million accounts, have complained about getting too many spam texts from businesses in recent months. WhatsApp, which quickly displaced the SMS app in the country by offering free texts, is increasingly looking like that SMS app, users say. Thousands of brands in India have signed up for WhatsApp, consistently succeeding in reaching eyeballs of more than 80% users, a person familiar with the matter said, a figure miles ahead of campaigns run on emails and traditional texts. What's more annoying is that even after users have blocked some businesses, many return to the inbox from different phone numbers, according to author's account.

The Federal Communications Commission is threatening to block calls from voice service providers that have yet to take meaningful action against illegal robocalls. The Verge reports: On Monday, the FCC announced that it was beginning the process to remove providers from the agency's Robocall Mitigation Database for failing to fully implement STIR/SHAKEN anti-robocall protocols into their networks. If the companies fail to meet these requirements over the next two weeks, compliant providers will be forced to block their calls. "This is a new era. If a provider doesn't meet its obligations under the law, it now faces expulsion from America's phone networks. Fines alone aren't enough," FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said in a statement on Monday. "Providers that don't follow our rules and make it easy to scam consumers will now face swift consequences."

The FCC's orders target seven carriers, including Akabis, Cloud4, Global UC, Horizon Technology Group, Morse Communications, Sharon Telephone Company, and SW Arkansas Telecommunications and Technology. "These providers have fallen woefully short and have now put at risk their continued participation in the U.S. communications system," Loyaan A. Egal, FCC acting chief of the enforcement standards, said in a Monday statement. "While we'll review their responses, we will not accept superficial gestures given the gravity of what is at stake."

Security researcher Brian Krebs writes: Someone has recently created a large number of fake LinkedIn profiles for Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) roles at some of the world's largest corporations. It's not clear who's behind this network of fake CISOs or what their intentions may be. But the fabricated LinkedIn identities are confusing search engine results for CISO roles at major companies, and they are being indexed as gospel by various downstream data-scraping sources. [...] Rich Mason, the former CISO at Fortune 500 firm Honeywell, began warning his colleagues on LinkedIn about the phony profiles earlier this week. "It's interesting the downstream sources that repeat LinkedIn bogus content as truth," Mason said. "This is dangerous, Apollo.io, Signalhire, and Cybersecurity Ventures." [...]

Again, we don't know much about who or what is behind these profiles, but in August the security firm Mandiant (recently acquired by Google) told Bloomberg that hackers working for the North Korean government have been copying resumes and profiles from leading job listing platforms LinkedIn and Indeed, as part of an elaborate scheme to land jobs at cryptocurrency firms. None of the profiles listed here responded to requests for comment (or to become a connection).

LinkedIn could take one simple step that would make it far easier for people to make informed decisions about whether to trust a given profile: Add a "created on" date for every profile. Twitter does this, and it's enormously helpful for filtering out a great deal of noise and unwanted communications. The former CISO Mason said LinkedIn also could experiment with offering something akin to Twitter's verified mark to users who chose to validate that they can respond to email at the domain associated with their stated current employer. Mason said LinkedIn also needs a more streamlined process for allowing employers to remove phony employee accounts. He recently tried to get a phony profile removed from LinkedIn for someone who falsely claimed to have worked for his company. In a statement provided to KrebsOnSecurity, LinkedIn said its teams were actively working to take these fake accounts down. "We do have strong human and automated systems in place, and we're continually improving, as fake account activity becomes more sophisticated," the statement reads. "In our transparency report we share how our teams plus automated systems are stopping the vast majority of fraudulent activity we detect in our community -- around 96% of fake accounts and around 99.1% of spam and scam."

The Federal Communications Commission approved a long-delayed proposal to crack down on spam texts Friday night after Axios asked agency members why it hadn't moved on the issue. From a report: The number of spam text messages -- which can include links or other tricks designed to steal money or personal information -- has exploded, with the volume now exceeding that of robocalls.The proposal, which passed on a 4-0 vote, seeks comment on requiring cellphone companies to block texts from numbers known to be illegal or fraudulent. It had been awaiting a vote at the FCC for nearly a year.

The FCC will review feedback on the proposal before writing final rules, a process that can take months. The measure also seeks comment on whether carriers should use third-party analytics providers to inform blocking efforts, and whether the agency should push the wireless industry to authenticate text messages like it does for phone calls to deter robocalls, a senior FCC official told Axios. "The American people are fed up with scam texts, and we need to use every tool we have to do something about it," chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat, told Axios ahead of the agency's vote.

A 36-year-old Russian man recently identified by KrebsOnSecurity as the likely proprietor of the massive RSOCKS botnet has been arrested in Bulgaria at the request of U.S. authorities. At a court hearing in Bulgaria this month, the accused hacker requested and was granted extradition to the United States, reportedly telling the judge, "America is looking for me because I have enormous information and they need it." From the report: On June 22, KrebsOnSecurity published Meet the Administrators of the RSOCKS Proxy Botnet, which identified Denis Kloster, a.k.a. Denis Emelyantsev, as the apparent owner of RSOCKS, a collection of millions of hacked devices that were sold as "proxies" to cybercriminals looking for ways to route their malicious traffic through someone else's computer. A native of Omsk, Russia, Kloster came into focus after KrebsOnSecurity followed clues from the RSOCKS botnet master's identity on the cybercrime forums to Kloster's personal blog, which featured musings on the challenges of running a company that sells "security and anonymity services to customers around the world." Kloster's blog even included a group photo of RSOCKS employees.

The Bulgarian news outlet 24Chasa.bg reports that Kloster was arrested in June at a co-working space in the southwestern ski resort town of Bansko, and that the accused asked to be handed over to the American authorities. "I have hired a lawyer there and I want you to send me as quickly as possible to clear these baseless charges," Kloster reportedly told the Bulgarian court this week. "I am not a criminal and I will prove it in an American court." 24Chasa said the defendant's surname is Emelyantsev and that he only recently adopted the last name Kloster, which is his mother's maiden name. As KrebsOnSecurity reported in June, Kloster also appears to be a major player in the Russian email spam industry. [...] Kloster turned 36 while awaiting his extradition hearing, and may soon be facing charges that carry punishments of up to 20 years in prison.

AmiMoJo shares a report from the Mozilla Foundation: YouTube's user controls -- buttons like "Dislike " and "Not interested" -- largely fail to help users avoid unwanted recommendations like misinformation and violent content, according to new research by Mozilla. An accompanying survey also found that YouTube's controls routinely frustrate and confuse users. Indeed, Mozilla's research found that people who are experiencing unwanted recommendations and turn to the platform's user controls for assistance prevent less than half of unwanted recommendations.

This is especially troubling because Mozilla's past research shows that YouTube recommends videos that violate its very own community guidelines, like misinformation, violent content, hate speech, and spam. For example, one user in this most recent research asked YouTube to stop recommending war footage from Ukraine -- but shortly after was recommended even more grisly content from the region. The study, titled "Does This Button Work? Investigating YouTube's ineffective user controls" is the culmination of months of rigorous qualitative and quantitative research. The study was made possible by the data of more than 20,000 participants who used Mozilla's RegretsReporter browser extension, and by data about more than 500 million YouTube videos. These are the top findings, as highlighted in the report: People don't trust YouTube's user controls. More than a third (39.3%) of people surveyed felt YouTube's user controls did not impact their recommendations at all, and 23% felt the controls had a mixed response. Said one interviewee: "Nothing changed. Sometimes I would report things as misleading and spam and the next day it was back in [...] Even when you block certain sources they eventually return."

People take matters into their own hands. Our study found that people did not always understand how YouTube's controls affect their recommendations, and so took a jury rigged approach instead. People will log out, create new accounts, or use privacy tools just to manage their YouTube recommendations. Said one user: "When the Superbowl came around ... if someone recommended a particular commercial, I used to log out of YouTube, watch the commercial, and then log back in."

The data confirms people are right. The most "effective" user control was "Don't recommend channel," but compared to users who do not make use of YouTube's user controls, only 43% of unwanted recommendations are prevented -- and recommendations from the unwanted channel sometimes persist. Other controls were even less effective: The "Not Interested" tool prevented only 11% of unwanted recommendations.

YouTube can fix this problem. YouTube has the power to confront this issue and do a better job at enabling people to control their recommendations. Our research outlines several concrete suggestions to put people back into the driver's seat, like making YouTube's controls more proactive, allowing users to shape their own experience; and giving researchers increased access to YouTube's API and other tools. Further reading: YouTube Targets TikTok With Revenue Sharing For Shorts, Partner Program Expansion

Google is launching a pilot program to keep emails from political campaigns from going to users' spam folders this week, the company told Axios. From the report: Google asked the Federal Election Commission in June if a program that would let campaigns emails bypass spam filters, instead giving users the option to move them to spam first, would be legal under campaign finance laws. Despite hundreds of negative comments submitted to the FEC arguing against it, the FEC approved the program in August. Eligible committees, abiding by security requirements and best practices as outlined by Google, can now register to participate.

Google has come under fire that its algorithms unfairly target conservative content across its services, and that its Gmail service filters more Republican fundraising and campaign emails to spam. This is partly based on a study from North Carolina State University, though its authors say it has been misconstrued. "We expect to begin the pilot with a small number of campaigns from both parties and will test whether these changes improve the user experience, and provide more certainty for senders during this election period," Jose Castaneda, a Google spokesperson, told Axios. "We will continue to listen and respond to feedback as the pilot progresses." He added: "During the pilot, users will be in control through a more prominent unsubscribe button."

From the Washington Post earlier this week: On Tuesday, The Washington Post reported that Twitter's former head of security, Peiter Zatko, had filed a whistleblower complaint with federal regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, accusing Twitter of "Lying about Bots to Elon Musk...."

"Twitter executives have little or no personal incentive to accurately 'detect' or measure the prevalence of spam bots," the complaint alleges, adding "deliberate ignorance was the norm" among its executive team.
The same article notes that three people familiar with Twitter's spam-detection, processes said Twitter's "internal bot prevalence numbers" were almost always less than 5%. (And the article reminds readers that Musk himself had waived his right to perform "due diligence" prior to striking the deal.)

But here's that Tuesday article's most prescient sentence. "The judge has rejected Musk's requests for information from more than 20 company leaders — including Zatko — but the whistleblower claims could open the door for them to make further requests, legal experts said."

Sure enough, Friday night CBS News reported that the judge "ordered both Twitter and Tesla CEO Elon Musk to turn over more information to opposing lawyers..." Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick on Thursday ordered Twitter to provide Musk's attorneys more data regarding the company's estimates that less than 5% of the accounts on its platform are fake.

The judge also rejected Musk's attempts to shield details about analyses he used in his attempt to terminate the deal. That work was done by data scientists who examined live-feed information from Twitter about public user accounts to test the company's daily-user counts....

The judge rejected more comprehensive data requests from Musk's attorneys as "absurdly broad," noting that a literal reading of the request would require Twitter to produce "trillions upon trillions of data points" reflecting all data collected on roughly 200 million accounts over three years. But McCormick did order Twitter to produce information on 9,000 accounts that were reviewed in connection with company's fourth-quarter audit, a data subset that has been described as a "historical snapshot."

McCormick also ordered Twitter to turn over documents regarding other metrics, regardless of whether they expressly address "monetizable daily active users," or mDAU. Musk's attorneys have suggested that a comparison of Twitter's mDAU with other metrics, such as "User Active Minutes," could support their theory that the company has fraudulently misled investors and securities regulators about the scope of activity on its platform.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Google has breached a European Union court ruling by sending unsolicited advertising emails directly to the inbox of Gmail users, Austrian advocacy group noyb.eu said on Wednesday in a complaint filed with France's data protection watchdog. The Alphabet unit, whose revenues mainly come from online advertising, should ask Gmail users for their prior consent before sending them any direct marketing emails, noyb.eu said, citing a 2021 decision by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJUE).

While Google's ad emails may look like normal ones, they include the word "Ad" in green letters on the left-hand side, below the subject of the email, noyb.eu said in its complaint. Also, they do not include a date, the advocacy group added. "It's as if the postman was paid to remove the ads from your mailbox and put his own instead," said Romain Robert, program director at noyb.eu, with reference to Gmail's anti-spam filters that put most unsolicited emails in a separate folder. While any CNIL decision would be only applicable in France, it could compel Google to review its practices in the region.

This year's major Android update, Android 13, is officially releasing today for Google's Pixel phones, the search giant has announced. From a report: The annual update is getting an official release a little earlier than usual, following Android 12's release last October and Android 11's release in September 2020. The list of updates arriving with this year's version of Android is likely to be familiar if you've been keeping up with Android 13's beta releases. There's the ability to customize non-Google app icons to match your homescreen wallpaper that we saw in Android 13's first developer preview, a new permission to cut down on notification spam, and a new option to limit which of your photos and videos an app can access.

Back in January, we wrote that Google planned to spend this year catching up with Apple's ecosystem integrations, and there's more evidence of this in Android 13's official release. The update includes support for spatial audio with head tracking, which is designed to make sounds appear as though they're coming from a fixed point in space when you move your head while wearing compatible headphones, similar to a feature Apple offers for its AirPods. Today's post doesn't say exactly which headphones this will work with, but Google previously announced it would be updating its Pixel Buds Pro to offer support for spatial audio. Secondly, there's the ability to stream messages from apps including Google Messages directly to a Chromebook, similar to iMessage on the Mac.

The US Federal Election Commission approved a Google plan to let campaign emails bypass Gmail spam filters. From a report: The FEC's advisory opinion adopted in a 4-1 vote said Gmail's pilot program is permissible under the Federal Election Campaign Act and FEC regulations "and would not result in the making of a prohibited in-kind contribution." The FEC said Google's approved plan is for "a pilot program to test new Gmail design features at no cost on a nonpartisan basis to authorized candidate committees, political party committees, and leadership PACs." On July 1, Google asked the FEC for the green light to implement the pilot after Republicans accused the company of giving Democrats an advantage in its algorithms. Republicans reportedly could have avoided some of their Gmail spam problems by using the proper email configuration. At a May 2022 meeting between Senate Republicans and Google's chief legal officer, "the most forceful rebuke" was said to come "from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who claimed that not a single email from one of his addresses was reaching inboxes," The Washington Post reported in late July. "The reason, it was later determined, was that a vendor had not enabled an authentication tool that keeps messages from being marked as spam, according to people briefed on the discussions."

If it weren't for Slashdot, Mark Zuckerberg wouldn't be facing a six-hour deposition over alleged involvement in the Cambridge Analytica Scandal, argues long-time Slashdot reader theodp: In 2003, Harvard's student newspaper the Harvard Crimson reported that Zuck's programming skills attracted attention from the likes of Microsoft and others following a 2003 Slashdot post. That post — titled Machine Learning and MP3s — described how "Students at Caltech [freshman Adam D'Angelo, Quora CEO and co-founder] and Harvard [freshman Zuck] developed a system that analyzes playlists and learns people's listening patterns." The playlist-making software, Synapse AI, was Zuck's high school senior project at Phillips Exeter Academy.

Interestingly, in a modded-up comment ("Informative") on the post, Slashdot user Mark Zuckerberg vowed to protect user privacy. "And a note about privacy," promised Zuck. "None of your musical listening data will be available to anyone other than you. We hope to use massive amounts of data to aid in analysis, but your individual data will never be seen by anyone else."

Hey, things change. And Slashdot user SkyIce (apparently D'Angelo) added, "I'm not going to spam people. I promise." .
Zuckerberg was just 18 years old — and Steven Levy's 2020 book Facebook: The Inside Story recounts how all "the Slashdot attention was a boon." Zuckerberg heard from multiple companies interested in the student project, including Microsoft and AOL. Zuckerberg and D'Angelo got an offer approaching a million dollars from one of those suitors. But the payout would be contingent on Zuckerberg and D'Angelo committing to work for that company for three years. They turned it down.
That summer, back in Cambridge, young Mark Zuckerberg "thought it was interesting that I was so excited about Friendster," D'Angelo remembered in the book. Friendster was an earlier social network founded in 2002 (which eventually closed in 2018). D'Angelo remembered that Zuckerberg "wasn't into it as a user, but it was clear to him that there was something there...."

"The Anonymous declaration of cyberwar was a top news story despite no evidence," writes cybersecurity specialist Jeremiah Fowler (an American who worked in Kyiv for the last 10 years — until fleeing in February to Poland). To investigate, Fowler performed a random sampling of 100 exposed Russian databases — and discovered that 92 of them had indeed been compromised. "Anti-Russian hackers used a similar script to the infamous 'MeowBot' that changed the name of folders and deleted the contents of the files. " (For example, renaming the folders to "putin_stop_this_war".)

And that was just the beginning, reports CNBC: Anonymous has claimed to have hacked over 2,500 Russian and Belarusian sites, said Fowler. In some instances, stolen data was leaked online, he said, in amounts so large it will take years to review. "The biggest development would be the overall massive number of records taken, encrypted or dumped online," said Fowler. Shmuel Gihon, a security researcher at the threat intelligence company Cyberint, agreed that amount of leaked data is "massive."

"We currently don't even know what to do with all this information, because it's something that we haven't expected to have in such a short period of time," he said....

The more immediate outcome of the hacks, Fowler and Gihon agreed, is that Russia's cybersecurity defenses have been revealed as being far weaker than previously thought.
Fowler's report argues that Anonymous has "rewritten the rules of how a crowdsourced modern cyberwar is conducted" — with the group also offering penetration testing to Ukraine, "finding vulnerabilities before Russia could exploit them." But in addition, Fowler writes, Anonymous's efforts have also "transformed into a larger operation that spread far beyond the Russian government, companies, or organizations, and included an information campaign aimed at Russian citizens."

Some examples: Hacking Printers — Russian censorship has blocked many inside the country from knowing the true scale of the war and Russian losses. Anonymous hacked printers across Russia and printed uncensored facts or anti-propaganda and pro-ukrainian messages. The group claims to have printed over 100,000 documents. This also includes barcode printers at grocery stores where prices were changed and product names were changed to anti-war or pro-Ukrainian slogans....

RoboDial, SMS, and Email Spam — Almost everyone on earth has received some form of spam in the form of a phone call, text, or email message. These usually try to sell a service or scam victims out of money. Now this same technology has been used to bypass Russian censorship and inform citizens of news and messages they are forbidden to learn on state sponsored propaganda channels. Anonymous affiliated Squad303 claimed to have sent over 100 million messages to Russian devices.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Earlier this month, Google sent a request (PDF) to the Federal Election Commission seeking an advisory opinion on the potential launch of a pilot program that would allow political committees to bypass spam filters and instead deliver political emails to the primary inboxes of Gmail users. During a public commenting period that's still ongoing, most people commenting have expressed staunch opposition for various reasons that they're hoping the FEC will consider. "Hard pass," wrote a commenter called Katie H. "Please do not allow Google to open up Pandora's Box on the people by allowing campaign/political emails to bypass spam filters."

Out of 48 comments submitted (PDF) as of July 11, only two commenters voiced support for Google's pilot program, which seeks to deliver more unsolicited political emails to Gmail users instead of marking them as spam. The rest of the commenters opposed the program, raising a range of concerns, including the potential for the policy to degrade user experience, introduce security risks, and even possibly unfairly influence future elections. Business Insider reported that the period for public commenting ends on Saturday, July 16, which is longer than what was shared in conflicting reports that said the initial deadline to comment was July 11. That means there's still time for more Gmail users and interested parties to chime in. "For some opposing commenters, it's about rejecting unnecessary strains on the Gmail user experience," adds Ars. "In short: People don't want emails coming to their inbox that they did not sign up for."

"Other commenters were more concerned over a perceived government overreach." There were also commenters that said the move could introduce security risks, influence elections, and make Gmail more vulnerable to "emotionally charged" messaging that they never signed up for.

An anonymous reader writes: There are three constants in life: death, taxes and the "lofi hip hop radio -- beats to relax/study to" YouTube stream. That is, until YouTube falsely hit the Lofi Girl channel with a DMCA takedown, bringing the beloved streams offline for the first time in over 2 years. With over 668 million views, the stream was one of YouTube's most popular places for people to go when they wanted to listen to calming, yet engaging music while studying or working. Listeners sometimes used the stream's live chat like an anonymized, distant study group, reminding each other to take breaks and drink water. So when the stream suddenly stopped, fans were worried.

[...] Yesterday, Lofi Girl addressed the sudden takedown in a tweet, stating that "the lofi radios have been taken down because of false copyright strikes." In response, fans of Lofi Girl circulated the tag #BringBackLofiGirl to get YouTube's attention. Some even went as far as to spam and troll FMC Music, the Malaysian label that allegedly issued the false copyright complaint, while others created fan art. Lofi Girl told TechCrunch that all of the channel's music is released through its record label, Lofi Records, so they have the necessary rights to share it. Because Lofi Girl has the proper rights to the music, YouTube determined that the account is not in violation of copyright laws. The platform responded to Lofi Girl on Twitter Monday, saying that the missing livestream videos should be reinstated in 24 to 48 hours.

If past precedent holds true, Lofi Girl's next stream will have to start again from the beginning, rather than as a continuation of the existing 2-year-long stream. In 2020, the channel faced a similar problem when an accidental suspension ended its 13,000-hour stream. In that case, YouTube also owned up to its mistakes and reinstated the account, but the same issues have apparently returned. [...] Today, in YouTube's reply to Lofi Girl, the company said that the takedown requests were "abusive," meaning that they were leveraged as an attack against the channel, rather than out of actual concern for copyright violations. This behavior is incredibly common, but platforms have struggled to determine when these reports are legitimate and when they're unsubstantiated. "This event has shone a light on an underlying problem on the platform: It's 2022, and there are countless smaller creators out there, many of which engaged in this discussion, that continue to be hit daily by these false claims on both videos and livestreams," Lofi Girl wrote in a tweet.

"We're shocked and disappointed to see that there's still not any kind of protection or manual review of these false claims," Lofi Girl wrote on Twitter. "At the end of the day, it was entirely out of our control, and the sad part is that there was no way to appeal beforehand/prevent it from happening."

Elon Musk just tweeted a picture of himself laughing — along with a caption he'd apparently added himself.

"They said I couldn't buy Twitter. Then they wouldn't disclose bot info. Now they want to force me to buy Twitter in court. Now they have to disclose bot info in court."

In fact, tonight The Register cited one of the documents Twitter filed in court after Musk's lawyer argued Twitter had "failed or refused" to provide info on spam accounts. But so far it's just a letter Musk's lawyer wrote to the court on Friday, explaining in more detail why Musk wants to call off the acquisition: One segment of the document claims that Musk and his team sought "a variety of board materials, including a working, bottom-up financial model for 2022, a budget for 2022, an updated draft plan or budget, and a working copy of Goldman Sachs' valuation model underlying its fairness opinion."

"Twitter has provided only a pdf copy of Goldman Sachs' final Board presentation."

Other disclosures, the document states, "come with strings attached, use limitations or other artificial formatting features, which has rendered some of the information minimally useful to Mr. Musk and his advisors.

"For example, when Twitter finally provided access to the eight developer 'APIs' first explicitly requested by Mr. Musk in the May 25 Letter, those APIs contained a rate limit lower than what Twitter provides to its largest enterprise customers. Twitter only offered to provide Mr. Musk with the same level of access as some of its customers after we explained that throttling the rate limit prevented Mr. Musk and his advisors from performing the analysis that he wished to conduct in any reasonable period of time.

"Additionally, those APIs contained an artificial 'cap' on the number of queries that Mr. Musk and his team can run regardless of the rate limit — an issue that initially prevented Mr. Musk and his advisors from completing an analysis of the data in any reasonable period of time," the document states.

Musk and his team raised the issue of query limits on June 29, but Twitter did not change the limit until July 6 — after Musk asked for its removal a second time.... Musk felt Twitter was in breach of the merger agreement. So he pulled the plug, leaving open the questions of why Twitter might have provided only limited access to its APIs, or why it could not offer more access given it operates at significant scale.
In fact, it's one of three reasons for ending the acquisition that Musk's lawyer makes in the letter. Materially-relevant figures on spam accounts were reason number one. ("Twitter has not provided information that Mr. Musk has requested for nearly two months notwithstanding his repeated, detailed clarifications intended to simplify Twitter's identification, collection, and disclosure of the most relevant information sought in Mr. Musk's original requests.")

But there's more... Musk's lawyer also argues Twitter is in breach of the merger agreement because of "materially inaccurate representations" — specifically their figures on monetizable daily active users. While Musk's analysis "remains ongoing, all indications suggest that several of Twitter's public disclosures...are either false or materially misleading." While Twitter has claimed they have a reasoned process for calculating monetizable daily active users (and the percentage of spam accounts), Musk's lawyer argues that instead the process "appears to be arbitrary and ad hoc," rendering Twitter's statements "false and misleading." And thus, "Mr. Musk has the right to seek rescission of the Merger Agreement in the event these material representations are determined to be false."

But finally Musk's lawyer provides a third reason for ending the acquisition. Twitter was required to "seek and obtain consent before deviating from its obligation to conduct its business in the ordinary course and 'preserve substantially intact the material components of its current business organization.'" The lawyer's letter argues that didn't happen: Twitter's conduct in firing two key, high-ranking employees, its Revenue Product Lead and the General Manager of Consumer, as well as announcing on July 7 that it was laying off a third of its talent acquisition team, implicates the ordinary course provision. Twitter has also instituted a general hiring freeze which extends even to reconsideration of outstanding job offers. Moreover, three executives have resigned from Twitter since the Merger Agreement was signed: the Head of Data Science, the Vice President of Twitter Service, and a Vice President of Product Management for Health, Conversation, and Growth.
But Twitter hadn't received "consent for changes in the conduct of its business, including for the specific changes listed above," according to Musk's lawyer, which "therefore constitute a material breach of Section 6.1 of the Merger Agreement."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Axios: The Federal Communications Commission on Thursday told carriers to stop delivering those annoying auto warranty robocalls and said it has launched a formal investigation. The scam has resulted in more than 8 billion unwanted and possibly illegal phone calls. It has been the top consumer robocall complaint for the past two years.

The FCC said it is working with a number of other agencies, including the Ohio attorney general, which is suing Roy Cox, Jr., Aaron Michael Jones, their Sumco Panama companies and other international associates said to be a part of the scam. The agency's enforcement bureau said it sent cease-and-desist letters to Call Pipe, Fugle Telecom, Geist Telecom, Global Lynks, Mobi Telecom, South Dakota Telecom, SipKonnect and Virtual Telecom to warn them to stop carrying this suspicious robocall traffic within 48 hours. The FCC said that its inquiry shows that the operation is still generating millions of apparently unlawful calls to consumers on a daily basis.