Advertisement Bluesky said it "quadrupled" its moderation team in a post on Friday. The app is working to address "handle-squatting" and impersonation accounts. It's also exploring how to enhance account verification based on user feedback. Bluesky has expanded its moderation team as curious social media users, many of whom are seeking an alternative to Elon Musk's X , flock to the app. The official account for Bluesky's Trust & Safety team published a thread on Friday that shared details about its impersonation policy. Advertisement The company said the policy has been updated to be more "aggressive," adding that "impersonation and handle-squatting accounts will be removed." "We have also quadrupled the size of our moderation team, in part to action impersonation reports more quickly. We still have a large backlog of moderation reports due to the influx of new users as we shared previously, though we are making progress," a post read. The company said that satire, fan, and parody accounts are allowed on Bluesky, but they must label themselves as such in the display name and bio for transparency. Identity churning — or changing an account's identity to mislead users — is prohibited on the app. Advertisement "If you set up an impersonation account just to gain followers and switch to a different identity that is no longer impersonation to keep that account, your account will be removed," a post read. Bluesky also responded to users who have asked for more concrete verification methods. "We also hear your feedback: users want more ways to verify their identity beyond domain verification," a post read. "We're exploring additional options to enhance account verification, and we hope to share more shortly." Advertisement Bluesky has more than 20 million users as of November 2024. Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto/Getty Images Representatives for Bluesky did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider. Related stories Bluesky began as a Twitter project in 2019 but has gained traction recently as some social media users grow weary of X due to concerns over hate speech and misinformation . X's approach to moderation faced criticism when Musk took control in 2022. After his arrival, Musk laid off content moderators and staffers on the moderation team. However, X's head of business operations told Bloomberg in January that it planned to hire 100 employees tasked with content moderation and build a content moderation center in Austin. Advertisement While Bluesky is still chasing X's success, it could challenge Threads , Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg's own Twitter knockoff. Bluesky announced in October that it had over 13 million users. One month later, Bluesky's COO told Business Insider that it had "blown past" its user growth projects and had surpassed 21 million users. The COO said the company had to acquire more servers to keep operations running smoothly.

OTTAWA—The Liberal government’s decision to cleave its controversial online harms legislation into two on Wednesday was framed by the federal justice minister as the quickest way to prioritize child safety in a Parliament he says the opposition Conservatives have plunged into paralysis. The widespread calls from civil liberties, human rights and religious minority groups to split up the bill were not one of the primary reasons Arif Virani said was behind the decision, though he acknowledged that some had been “suggesting” he make the move. “What we looked at in September was a parliamentary calendar that had three months’ worth of time. In three months’ worth of time, we’ve had exactly one day of debate dedicated to this bill. Is that frustrating for me? You’re absolutely right, that’s frustrating for me,” Virani told reporters. The legislation has been fraught with controversy from its earliest stages of development over The legislation at issue is the Trudeau Liberals’ proposed solution to dangerous content on the internet: a sweeping bill that has drawn praise for its efforts to hold social media platforms accountable for the content they host, and criticism for changes to the Criminal Code and Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) that some say polices free speech. On Wednesday, Virani announced that all four parts of the bill will be split into two groups. One legislative track will deal with the parts of the bill that mostly address harmful content directed at children. The first of those parts is the Online Harms Act, which would require social media platforms — including livestreaming and adult-content services — to minimize exposure to seven types of harmful content. Three of those categories focus on children: content used to bully a child, content that induces children to harm themselves, and content that sexually victimizes a child or revictimizes a survivor of child abuse. The remaining four deal with other harms: content in which intimate images (including deepfakes) are shared without consent, content that incites violent extremism or terrorism, content that incites violence and content that promotes hatred. That entire part of the legislation will be combined with another part of the original bill that proposes changes to how child pornography on the internet is reported and how those offences are handled. Those two sections of the bill have been widely viewed as the more acceptable parts of the legislation, by experts and opposition parties alike. But the decision means that the bill’s remaining two parts — proposed changes to the Criminal Code and the CHRA that have been deemed “ ” and poorly thought out — will be combined into one. The legislation had proposed creating a stand-alone hate crime offence that could be applied to every offence in the Criminal Code, and could come with a maximum penalty of life in prison. Other changes involved upping penalties for hate propaganda offences, such as increasing the maximum penalty for advocating for or promoting genocide from five years to life imprisonment. Ottawa has previously said the legislation is not intended to put people behind bars for life for expressing opinions, but instead would twin the new hate crime offence with existing Criminal Code offences already punishable by a maximum of life in prison. The new offence was partly meant, government officials have said, to improve how hate-motivated offences are tracked and prosecuted. The CHRA changes, meanwhile, would allow people to file online hate speech complaints — which could be enormous in volume — to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which could result in financial penalties or content being removed. Virani justified the split as necessary in a House of Commons that has been waylaid by debate on a single issue — whether the Liberals should pony up more unredacted documents tied to a scandal-plagued green technology funding agency — for more than two months. The original legislation was tabled in late February, missing the deadline by which the Liberals promised to initially introduce the bill by two years. Virani said the parliamentary impasse made the Liberals “rethink” how they should use their time to get parts of the bill past the legislative finish line. “I’m not going to look at the face of Canadian parents, of Canadian children, and tell them that I’m not going to do everything I can to protect those kids,” Virani said. Angus Lockhart, a senior analyst with Toronto Metropolitan University’s policy institute, the Dais, said the move is a positive step forward, even if it’s indicative of “the time pressure of a government that’s running out of time.” The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) welcomed the decision, saying in a statement that the more contentious parts of the legislation can now undergo the “focused scrutiny it deserves.” The CCLA was one of more than 20 groups and experts who , back in May, for the legislation to be split in two over free speech and other concerns. In spite of the criticism, particularly due to the Israel-Hamas war and its ripple effects in Canada, the federal government has insisted the changes on Canadians’ freedoms. Conservative justice critic Larry Brock told the Star in a statement that Virani was “desperately trying to salvage his deeply flawed legislation.” “We will repeal Trudeau’s draconian censorship laws and bring home protection of children and Canadians online while protecting the rights and freedoms of Canadians,” the statement read. It is not yet clear how the separation of a singular bill into two tracks will be handled by the House of Commons. Virani’s spokesperson said the minister was in talks with his opposition counterparts to determine how the bill already before the House, and whose text remains unchanged, could proceed through the remainder of the legislative process.Maharashtra Election Results 2024: MVA's Weak Candidacies Helped Mahayuti Secure Historic Leads In Colaba & Malabar Hill

ChatGPT owner OpenAI is set to face lawsuits from five Canadian news companies for frequent breaches of copyright and online terms of use. The news companies have joined the long list of companies, artists, and authors who have filed lawsuits against OpenAI over accusations of using data to train its AI model. In a joint statement, Torstar, Postmedia, The Globe and Mail, The Canadian Press, and CBC/Radio-Canada stated that OpenAI was collecting vast amounts of content to build its products without seeking permission or compensating the content creators. The companies said, "Journalism is in the public interest. OpenAI using other companies' journalism for their own commercial gain is not. It's illegal." ALSO READ | Google Faces Fresh CCI Probe Following Complaint From Real-Money Gaming Firm WinZO: Here's What Went Down On November 7, a federal judge in New York dismissed a lawsuit filed against OpenAI, which accused the company of improperly using articles from Raw Story and AlterNet. Meanwhile, in an 84-page claim submitted to Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice, five Canadian media companies are seeking damages from OpenAI and an injunction to stop the company from using their content without permission. They added, "Rather than seek to obtain the information legally, OpenAI has elected to brazenly misappropriate the News Media Companies' valuable intellectual property and convert it for its own uses, including commercial uses, without consent or consideration. The News Media Companies have never received from OpenAI any form of consideration, including payment, in exchange for OpenAI's use of their Works." OpenAI Responds In its defense, OpenAI stated that its models were trained using publicly accessible data, in accordance with fair use and international copyright guidelines that it believes are fair to content creators. Reuters quoted an OpenAI spokesperson as saying, "We collaborate closely with news publishers, including in the display, attribution and links to their content in ChatGPT search, and offer them easy ways to opt out should they so desire." The document from the Canadian news companies did not reference Microsoft. However, this month, billionaire Elon Musk broadened his lawsuit against OpenAI to include Microsoft, accusing the two companies of unlawfully attempting to dominate the generative AI market and push out competitors.

NoneHexClad Black Friday deals: Save up to 40% on cookware Gordon Ramsay calls 'utter perfection'Oklahoma vs. LSU FREE LIVE STREAM (11/30/24): Watch college football, Week 14 online | Time, TV, channel

No. 18 Mississippi 89, Alabama St. 24None

Recreational Boats Market to Grow by USD 6.28 Billion (2024-2028) Rising Boating Activities Driving Revenue, Report on AI-Driven Market Transformation - TechnavioThe Nokia Corp. ADR .css-321ztr-OverridedLink.css-321ztr-OverridedLink:any-link{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;color:rgba(54,119,168,1);border-bottom:1px solid;border-bottom-color:rgba(54,119,168,1);}.css-321ztr-OverridedLink.css-321ztr-OverridedLink:any-link.css-321ztr-OverridedLink.css-321ztr-OverridedLink:any-link svg{fill:rgba(54,119,168,1);}.css-321ztr-OverridedLink.css-321ztr-OverridedLink:any-link:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;color:rgba(47,112,157,1);border-bottom:1px solid;border-bottom-color:rgba(47,112,157,1);}.css-321ztr-OverridedLink.css-321ztr-OverridedLink:any-link:hover.css-321ztr-OverridedLink.css-321ztr-OverridedLink:any-link:hover svg{fill:rgba(47,112,157,1);} .css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink{display:inline;color:var(--color-interactiveLink010);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}@media screen and (prefers-reduced-motion: no-preference){.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink{transition-property:color,fill;transition-duration:200ms,200ms;transition-timing-function:cubic-bezier(0, 0, .5, 1),cubic-bezier(0, 0, .5, 1);}}@media screen and (prefers-reduced-motion: reduce){.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink{transition-property:color,fill;transition-duration:0ms;transition-timing-function:cubic-bezier(0, 0, .5, 1),cubic-bezier(0, 0, .5, 1);}}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink svg{fill:var(--color-interactiveLink010);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:hover:not(:disabled){color:var(--color-interactiveLink020);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:hover:not(:disabled) svg{fill:var(--color-interactiveLink020);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:active:not(:disabled){color:var(--color-interactiveLink030);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:active:not(:disabled) svg{fill:var(--color-interactiveLink030);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:visited:not(:disabled){color:var(--color-interactiveVisited010);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:visited:not(:disabled) svg{fill:var(--color-interactiveVisited010);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:visited:hover:not(:disabled){color:var(--color-interactiveVisited010);-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:visited:hover:not(:disabled) svg{fill:var(--color-interactiveVisited010);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:focus-visible:not(:disabled){outline-color:var(--outlineColorDefault);outline-style:var(--outlineStyleDefault);outline-width:var(--outlineWidthDefault);outline-offset:var(--outlineOffsetDefault);}@media not all and (min-resolution: 0.001dpcm){@supports (-webkit-appearance: none) and (stroke-color: transparent){.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:focus-visible:not(:disabled){outline-style:var(--safariOutlineStyleDefault);}}}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:any-link{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;color:rgba(54,119,168,1);border-bottom:1px solid;border-bottom-color:rgba(54,119,168,1);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:any-link.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:any-link svg{fill:rgba(54,119,168,1);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:any-link:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;color:rgba(47,112,157,1);border-bottom:1px solid;border-bottom-color:rgba(47,112,157,1);}.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:any-link:hover.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink.css-1vykwuz-OverridedLink:any-link:hover svg{fill:rgba(47,112,157,1);} NOK shed 2.82% to $4.13 Thursday, on what proved to be an all-around great trading session for the stock market, with the NASDAQ Composite Index COMP rising 0.03% to 18,972.42 and the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA rising 1.06% to 43,870.35. Nokia Corp. ADR closed $0.82 short of its 52-week high ($4.95), which the company reached on October 28th.Salamanca punches ticket to state title gameWASHINGTON (AP) — A tax break for millionaires, and almost everyone else. An end to the COVID-19-era government subsidies that some Americans have used to purchase health insurance. Limits to food stamps, including for women and children, and other safety net programs. Rollbacks to Biden-era green energy programs . Mass deportations . Government job cuts to “drain the swamp.” Having won the election and sweeping to power, Republicans are planning an ambitious 100-day agenda with President-elect Donald Trump in the White House and GOP lawmakers in a congressional majority to accomplish their policy goals. Atop the list is the plan to renew some $4 trillion in expiring GOP tax cuts , a signature domestic achievement of Trump's first term and an issue that may define his return to the White House. “What we’re focused on right now is being ready, Day 1,” said House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., after meeting recently with GOP colleagues to map out the road ahead. The policies emerging will revive long-running debates about America's priorities , its gaping income inequities and the proper size and scope of its government, especially in the face of mounting federal deficits now approaching $2 trillion a year . The discussions will test whether Trump and his Republican allies can achieve the kinds of real-world outcomes wanted, needed or supported when voters gave the party control of Congress and the White House . “The past is really prologue here,” said Lindsay Owens, executive director of the Groundwork Collaborative, recalling the 2017 tax debate. Trump’s first term became defined by those tax cuts, which were approved by Republicans in Congress and signed into law only after their initial campaign promise to “repeal and replace” Democratic President Barack Obama's health care law sputtered, failing with the famous thumbs-down vote by then-Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. The GOP majority in Congress quickly pivoted to tax cuts, assembling and approving the multitrillion-dollar package by year’s end. In the time since Trump signed those cuts into law, the big benefits have accrued to higher-income households. The top 1 percent — those making nearly $1 million and above — received about a $60,000 income tax cut, while those with lower incomes got as little as a few hundred dollars, according to the Tax Policy Center and other groups. Some people ended up paying about the same. “The big economic story in the U.S. is soaring income inequality,” said Owens. “And that is actually, interestingly, a tax story.” In preparation for Trump’s return, Republicans in Congress have been meeting privately for months and with the president-elect to go over proposals to extend and enhance those tax breaks, some of which would otherwise expire in 2025. That means keeping in place various tax brackets and a standardized deduction for individual earners, along with the existing rates for so-called pass-through entities such as law firms, doctors' offices or businesses that take their earnings as individual income. Typically, the price tag for the tax cuts would be prohibitive. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that keeping the expiring provisions in place would add some $4 trillion to deficits over a decade. Adding to that, Trump wants to include his own priorities in the tax package, including lowering the corporate rate, now at 21% from the 2017 law, to 15%, and doing away with individual taxes on tips and overtime pay. But Avik Roy, president of the Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity, said blaming the tax cuts for the nation's income inequality is “just nonsense” because tax filers up and down the income ladder benefited. He instead points to other factors, including the Federal Reserve's historically low interest rates that enable borrowing, including for the wealthy, on the cheap. “Americans don’t care if Elon Musk is rich,” Roy said. “What they care about is, what are you doing to make their lives better?” Typically, lawmakers want the cost of a policy change to be offset by budget revenue or reductions elsewhere. But in this case, there's almost no agreed-upon revenue raisers or spending cuts in the annual $6 trillion budget that could cover such a whopping price tag. Instead, some Republicans have argued that the tax breaks will pay for themselves, with the trickle-down revenue from potential economic growth. Trump’s tariffs floated this past week could provide another source of offsetting revenue. Some Republicans argue there's precedent for simply extending the tax cuts without offsetting the costs because they are not new changes but existing federal policy. “If you’re just extending current law, we’re not raising taxes or lowering taxes," said Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, the incoming chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, on Fox News. He said the criticism that tax cuts would add to the deficit is “ridiculous.” There is a difference between taxes and spending, he said, "and we just have to get that message out to America.” At the same time, the new Congress will also be considering spending reductions, particularly to food stamps and health care programs, goals long sought by conservatives as part of the annual appropriations process. One cut is almost certain to fall on the COVID-19-era subsidy that helps defray the cost of health insurance for people who buy their own policies via the Affordable Care Act exchange. The extra health care subsidies were extended through 2025 in Democratic President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act, which also includes various green energy tax breaks that Republicans want to roll back. The House Democratic leader, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries of New York, scoffed at the Republican claim that they've won “some big, massive mandate” — when in fact, the House Democrats and Republicans essentially fought to a draw in the November election, with the GOP eking out a narrow majority. “This notion about some mandate to make massive, far-right extreme policy changes, it doesn't exist — it doesn't exist,” Jeffries said. Republicans are planning to use a budgetary process, called reconciliation, that allows majority passage in Congress, essentially along party lines, without the threat of a filibuster in the Senate that can stall out a bill’s advance unless 60 of the 100 senators agree. It’s the same process Democrats have used when they had the power in Washington to approve the Inflation Reduction Act and Obama's health care law over GOP objections. Republicans have been here before with Trump and control of Congress, which is no guarantee they will be able to accomplish their goals, particularly in the face of resistance from Democrats. Still, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., who has been working closely with Trump on the agenda, has promised a “breakneck” pace in the first 100 days “because we have a lot to fix.” The story has been corrected to reflect that Lindsay Owens of the Groundwork Collaborative spoke of ‘income inequality,' not ‘income equality.’

EW LEGAL DEADLINE: Edwards Lifesciences Class Action Deadline is Approaching – Contact BFA Law if You Suffered Losses (NYSE:EW)

Stock market today: Wall Street hits records despite tariff talkArsenal 5-2 West Ham (1 Dec, 2024) Game Analysis - ESPN Australia

Scott Bessent a credible, safe pick for Treasury: experts

Commanders place kicker Austin Seibert on injured reserve