Thread by Lynne Up North - 🇺🇦 - 😷&full💉

twitter.com
1 Recommender
1 Mention
Recommend
Post
Save
Complete
Collect
Thread
I had stayed out of the whole Bouzy ToS mess for days, but seriously, this is bugging me, so here goes.

I'm going to start with the fact that I am not on Spoutible, for IT reasons (more on that in a bit), so clearly I haven't seen the full exchange and I say this up front.
1/n
The technical:
I understand what Spoutible wants to do.
However, I also read over the Courtney Milan twitter thread which details the specific questions & concerns, and not only do I think they're valid, I can't see where they're specifically addressed and answered.
2/n
Anyone who's ever dealt with software development, nevermind law, knows that the Devil lives in the edge cases, and this is specifically what Milan brings up with examples of how the ToS *could* be abused. Nowhere did she say that it is ~currently~ being abused that way.
3/n
This being the case, the repetitions of "that's nonsense because we haven't been banned!" don't really matter; the issue is the potential for future problems. I think those are real.
4/n
Milan does note, one cogent point is that the ToS as stated offers ban as a default reaction with exceptions for specific purposes, rather than an assumption of tolerance with ban for things that cross a line, a fine legal distinction which can matter in practice -
5/n
and more to the point, that there are categories of legitimate exception that are excluded (e.g. 'political') and that things which are stated in the summary are not in the full ToS. That's sloppy. I honestly think that the clarifications that were asked for are things that -
6/n
CAN legitimately be asked. I understand that "legitimately asked" is a sticking point for many, back to that in a bit.

Now, twitter is messing with threads, I'm going to post these and then continue with another link, to see if this works.
7/n
Ok, so.
One part of this mess is that I have only seen people screenshotting Bouzy saying "we will not host adult content and the ToS will not change." Like, yes, ok. But that doesn't answer the *specifics* of the request for clarification.
8/n
Do the actual clarifications of policy happen in the Spaces stream? (because I'm sorry, I don't have the 2 hours to sit through the whole thing - besides, that clearly happened well after all this blew up). Are the specific edge cases addressed?
9/n
Simply repeating the same thing over and over doesn't clarify. Pressing for clarification isn't wrong or bad where there are open questions. "Not going to host adult content, not going to change the ToS" doesn't deal with those edge cases.
10/n
A lot of Black creatives and STEM people interpret the offer to help with the ToS as intrusion and a demand to take over, but I can only see that interpretation as being rooted in existing anger about whose tech is welcomed, sorry.

Which brings me to the context.
11/n
Seen people say "Couldn't stand to see a Black man make something good without interfering" - I can absolutely see this as a reaction of anger and frustration from a population historically frozen out of tech development.

...thread refresh, hang on....
12/n
I'm sorry about chopping up my thread this way, but I tried posting a long total thread, and twitter just sent the damn thing into limbo never to be seen again. So.

13/n
Fact is, there's a personal context here as well as a cultural one.

14/n
From a writer's perspective, can you see how this would be something you have concerns about for your genre, if you are actually worried about a platform not handling it well? Seeing people attribute the "demand" to be involved and the public airing of issues to be malice...
15/n
...but how, precisely, would you distinguish this from something like "Writer Beware, here is a pitfall, it may not be worth investing your time if they can't reassure you it won't blow up in your face" when someone is actually worried about it?
16/n
I know that there's a historical inequity in who gets extended grace and an assumption of good faith, and it doesn't work in favour of the Black community, but it doesn't necessarily mean that other people are working in bad faith either, and that fact clearly gets lost.
17/n
Speaking of bad faith, the number of messages to & about Milan that I've seen which are all "You want to turn Spoutible into OnlyFans! Why you want to show your boobs?!" are clearly bad faith. These aren't honest interpretations, are they. Fix yourself.
18/n
I was honestly disturbed by the viciousness and spite in a lot of these messages, aimed at another WoC, there are some really horrible comments out there, and people I thought were better than that retweeting them. I have no words how much this is awful.
19/n
But then, um, Bouzy.
Ok, look. He doesn't come without context either.
I know that Black people in tech development face a lot of frustration and outright hostility in the field and people are primed for defense it because jfc it's been going on for decades. For *forever*.
20/n
It's absolutely no wonder so many people are mad about more of the same. But bad cultural reality doesn't mean that individual people are automatically virtuous even when they're facing that, and the hostile environment interacts with actual bad acting in complex ways.
21/n
I've been aware of Bouzy in the software field since he floated his "95% accurate lie detection" software in 2000 (seriously, that was a big fat NNNNNOPE). He's been involved in things which range from "dubious business venture" to "outright fraud" more than once -
22/n
...including not 1 but 2 crypto scams, and, outside the software field, lying about finances in a bankruptcy.

I genuinely appreciate the fact that recently he was working to defend Meghan Markle, and yes, I do really understand the ambition for Spoutible.
23/n
And I am willing to accept that there are people who clean up their act and get a lot better...but there are issues with Spoutible already which do NOT reassure me.

...Sorry, thread refresh again.
24/n
Examples of issues:
The public API exposed data immediately after starting. Ok, new platform, absolutely, glitches happen, teething problems, fine - but he did NOT respond well or appropriately. First there was denial, then there was a lot of downplaying...
25/n
Even now, I don't know if there has been any formal notice or reporting about personal data being exposed.

I truly don't know where exactly Spoutible is hosted, but even in the US there are a bunch of state laws about notification....
26/n
(like found in www.itgovernanceusa.com/data-breach-notification-laws) -- and I've seen nothing said in the infosec community that indicates that any processes have been followed with that breach. Were they? Does anyone know?
Honestly, I hope I'm wrong, and if anyone can tell me more -
27/n
- I will happily correct myself.
But then.
Then the whole issue of the DMCA designated agent, which, as of this morning, there still wasn't one. 😫 Dude. Someone honestly does need to be registered, but this needed registered 3 weeks ago.
28/n
It's $6 and it's not a complicated process, and not having one opens up MASSIVE legal liabilities. WHAT is going ON?

29/n
I've seen people stating that they were sure he had a legal panel already well on top of things, but I'm sorry, I don't share in your confidence about that.

30/n
He has too much actual history of not taking care of the legal care of duty, and I'm seeing details like what's missing here as big red flags.

And, um. I'm seeing comments about the setup of the site itself that I don't like, if they are true.
31/n
I've seen comments that inputs aren't sanitised and the site is open to injection attacks with entity codes. Classic "Little Bobby Tables" stuff -
xkcd.com/327/

Ok, I hope this is wrong. I'm not checking by doing, I want to stay on the right side of the law.
32/n
I am not deliberately presuming incompetence. I don't WANT to presume incompetence. This horrifies me. But I have to make my judgements based on what I have seen *done*.
33/n
Fact is, Bouzy didn't build the site himself from the ground up; the base code was bought. It's commonly done, it's not incompetence, that's how most people roll. And it has undoubtedly been made better, but.
34/n
I am wary of being inadvertently racist by pushing a narrative on incompetence on someone, and I really try to keep an eye on what my own prejudices might be, but these are technical details again and they MATTER to me.
35/n
When it comes right down to it, what I am seeing on the web is a lot of spite, bile and worst-possible-interpretation aimed at Romancelandia and authors, even though I haven't seen Milan ever being a bad actor in the past.
36/n
And I HAVE seen Bouzy being a bad actor in the past, or at the most charitable interpretation, being careless of what tech actually can and can't do, being careless of the people who invest a lot into it.

I want this to be better, but I don't think it is.
37/n
Anyway, I've left out a few thoughts, but this covers quite a bit of what I've been thinking.

RIP my mentions in advance.

38/end
Mentions
See All