X, the company formerly known as Twitter, has become the first online platform to be issued with a $610,500 fine under Australia’s Online Safety Act for its failure to meet basic online safety expectations.

X has 28 days to either pay the fine, issued by the e-safety commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, or provide responses to questions X ignored from the commissioner on its work to crack down on child sexual abuse material on the platform.

The legal notices were issued to X, Google, TikTok, Twitch and Discord in February following the first round of notices sent to Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Snap and Omegle last year.

  • Serinus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    They refused to respond to an Australian government investigation. (Because Elon fired the two people who interfaced with Australia.)

    The fine is not directly because they haven’t cracked down*, but because they couldn’t competently answer if they’re handling it at all.

    (* and they’ve probably fired enough trust and safety people that they’re also having trouble there, but that’s not exactly what the fine is for.)

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    theyre already billions in the hole, tons of lawsuits that are not going to go their way, and not cheaply…

    how long til he pulls the old bankruptcy plug?

    • Staple_Diet@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It can run at a loss. I believe the real motive here was to deplatform some users, or at least limit the functionality and usefulness of the platform. Twitter’s reach was vast, and activists were using its reach to speak out against oppressive Governments (amongst other things). The previous two US elections also demonstrated the power and influence of Social media. Elon can run X at a loss, funded by Saudi (and others) as long as it stays larger than competitors.

      As much as we’d like them to be, Mastodon et al are not nearly big enough to compete at the moment, and it will take some time to match the critical mass of X. Thus, as much as users might complain, those that require a loudspeaker platform (journalists, celebrities, politicians, academics) are compelled to still use X lest they themselves become irrelevant.

      • Zron@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Twitter could run at a loss because of its investors. They were a major public communication platform with a huge user count, so investors were keen to pump money into it because it had the perception of a stable company, and they were probably able to secure loans based on those investments and their assets.

        Elon has systematically gutted the company, and destroyed its brand recognition(see how every article that mention it has added a clarification when they mention X)

        Their stock took a dive and has now just regained some of its pre musk value, but with the constant news about subscription models and more changes, who knows how long that will last.

      • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Kinda funny since I’ve never had a Twitter or x account but I do have a pemmy account. Obv anecdotal but still

        • Staple_Diet@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it is safe to assume that the percentage of Lemmy users that actively use/d Twitter is quite low. Even Reddit was dominated by anti-Twitter/Meta sentiment, which has been further concentrated here.

          The only mainstream platform I would say a large percentage of Lemmings use would be LinkedIn, and even then it’s recognised as a necessary evil rather than an additive service.

  • force@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wow, that’s so much! That’s like if I got fined $0.20 for that, since this is like 1/23,000 of their net worth…

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why would he meet safety expectations when his entire user base at this point are conservative NAZIs. He’d only be shooting himself in the foot if he alienated the remaining degenerates that use that shit platform.

    • gullible@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ragebait hatestorm is such a weird platform, and that it continues to maintain a user base is legitimately an existential human moral failure. Mastodon is right there.

    • atetulo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      his entire user base at this point are conservative NAZIs.

      Delusion just isn’t a river in Egypt.

      • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Gonna block you now.

        (Did I say that right? Seems that’s the entirety of your comment history, so you’d be the expert)

  • mateomaui@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    has become the first online platform to be issued with a $610,500 fine under Australia’s Online Safety Act