The obvious context is that either Meta gets out of the content moderation game voluntarily, or the incoming admin goes to war with them.
> focusing our enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations.
I imagine this will in practice determine how far they can go in the EU. Community notes, sure. No moderation? Maybe not.
But... Community Notes is subject to "tampering." Elon's either removes the CNs himself from his posts, or his brigade downvote them to infinity so they don't appear on all the misinfo he posts.
I don't know if this is the case, but X is Elon's property, so he can shape it as he pleases. Assuming that X (or Facebook) is unbiased and working for your benefit is simply foolish, unless you are Musk (or Zuckerberg).
I am not so sure that Musk or right-wing moderators are directly to blame for the lack of published community notes. My guess: in recent months, many people (e.g., me) who are motivated to counter fake news have left Twitter for other platforms. Thus, proposed CNs are seen and upvoted by fewer people, resulting in fewer of them being shown to the public. Also, I ask myself: why should I spend time verifying or writing CNs when it does not matter - the emperor knows that he is not wearing any clothes, and he does not care.
But of course he can turn it off. He owns the entire platform and algorithms on it.
If you do not think Elon could be controlling the moderation of his own account then you are either hopelessly naive or responding in bad faith. Either way, I will not be responding again.
The data I can find says it was last updated 9:02 PM Jan. 5, 2025 (presumably America/Chicago from my browser). That’s a >2 day window as of writing this comment.
Not throwing any accusation, just trying to understand the technicals.
If there was any manipulation of community notes in the last 2 days, how would we know?
If there’s manipulation of this data before it is published, such as ratings or notes never hitting these data files, how would we know?
Maybe, an individual could check to see their own contributions are included in updates to the published data. Is that sufficiently common such that it would get caught?
Community note data I can find (log in required): https://x.com/i/communitynotes/download-data
You can't know until the data is published. 2 days isn't that long though. Just wait a couple more days for the next data dump, then run the algorithm and compare the results to what the X UI was showing at that time.
> If there’s manipulation of this data before it is published, such as ratings or notes never hitting these data files, how would we know?
That would be a bit more sneaky than just outright removing notes. As you noted, you'd need a user whose ratings or notes were omitted from the dump to notice and come forward. Or perhaps with careful analysis you could prove that the manipulated data could not have resulted in the allegedly removed note being shown and then later not shown, indicating something fishy happened.
Theoretically if X wanted to improve on this system, they could go even further and implement something like certificate transparency (append-only log verified by a publicly distributed merkle tree), or create an independent third party organization that users interact with to submit and rate notes, rather than that happening through X's UI. Given the threat model though, I feel like the UX and complexity trade-offs of that wouldn't be worth it. Open sourcing the data and algorithm as X has is already far more transparency than we get from any competing social media company.