It is primarily about curbing the increasing influence
Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2024 10:05 am
So far, I've used it to publish a photo that I've manually posted on Instagram to Facebook and Twitter as well. So I write the text myself and take the photo myself and publish both manually on Instagram. IFTTT then posts the same thing to my Facebook and Twitter profiles. So it's just doing what I would do if I didn't use IFTTT. I don't see a problem there either, because the content wasn't created automatically. To mark social media posts or not? As is often the case, the wording of the law is unfortunately not as clear as one might have hoped.
The text can be interpreted in different ways and in the end one will taiwan phone numbers probably have to wait for judgments to have clarity. In my opinion, however, the intention of the law should always be taken into account. It is primarily about curbing the increasing influence of opinion through fake news and similar things from social media bots, or at least ensuring more transparency. I think that is a good approach, and advertising posts that are created purely automatically should also be recognizable as such. However, the question remains as to how relevant and practical this really is. Who can track whether a post was published by a person or created automatically? This is often very difficult to detect and the bots are getting better and better.
Personally, I think automation is great, but I decided a while ago not to have social media posts for my articles created completely automatically. Instead, I create them manually, but plan them in advance, which in my opinion shouldn't be a problem. I don't think it's a good idea to use bots to automate everything, but it's not forbidden. You just have to mark content from bots. Do you use social media bots? What is the situation for you? To what extent have you automated your social media publications and is anything changing for you due to the new legal situation?
The text can be interpreted in different ways and in the end one will taiwan phone numbers probably have to wait for judgments to have clarity. In my opinion, however, the intention of the law should always be taken into account. It is primarily about curbing the increasing influence of opinion through fake news and similar things from social media bots, or at least ensuring more transparency. I think that is a good approach, and advertising posts that are created purely automatically should also be recognizable as such. However, the question remains as to how relevant and practical this really is. Who can track whether a post was published by a person or created automatically? This is often very difficult to detect and the bots are getting better and better.
Personally, I think automation is great, but I decided a while ago not to have social media posts for my articles created completely automatically. Instead, I create them manually, but plan them in advance, which in my opinion shouldn't be a problem. I don't think it's a good idea to use bots to automate everything, but it's not forbidden. You just have to mark content from bots. Do you use social media bots? What is the situation for you? To what extent have you automated your social media publications and is anything changing for you due to the new legal situation?