Folgen
-
Time to time, another platform makes headlines for the wrong reason. A user who had been flagged repeatedly escalates to a credible threat. A gig economy worker with a history of boundary violations commits a serious incident. An online community moderator misses the warning signs of a user in crisis.
In almost every post-incident review, the same finding surfaces: the signals were there. They just weren’t being read correctly.
This podcast is the audio companion to Grey Inflection Intelligence, the written publication at greyinflection.com. Each episode goes beyond the written analysis, bringing in additional context, extended examples, and the kind of operational detail that doesn’t always fit neatly into print. If you’ve read Issue 001, this episode will deepen it. If you haven’t, it stands on its own.
In Episode One, Lead Analyst Marcus Cole and Research Analyst Sara Voss examine why most Trust and Safety teams are operating with the wrong methodology for one of the most serious problems they face, and what three decades of law enforcement threat assessment has to offer.
What we cover: Content moderation vs. threat assessment: why conflating them is a structural problem. The pathway to violence research that law enforcement built its frameworks on, the three gaps in how platforms currently operate, what genuine threat assessment capability actually looks like in practice and why AI-based content moderation cannot substitute for human threat assessment.
Read the written analysis first (or after): Issue 001 at greyinflection.com
Grey Inflection Intelligence publishes at least twice monthly. Subscribe free at greyinflection.com and receive every issue directly to your inbox.
This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit greyinflection.com -
Fehlende Folgen?
