pull down to refresh
I'm curious what you think of this article:
If no section 230, do you prefer platforms being liable for user content, or some other system?
platforms being liable for content, same as how everything worked circa 1997. Just roll back the clock.
No new laws, just delete old law that didn't work. simple.
basically google should have same rules for publishing defamatory or fucked up content as new york times.
so ugc (user generated content) on commercial platforms becomes a much more scary proposition for big tech that have turned it into an dopamine and hate slot machine.
nostr and usenet should be fine because not commercial platforms. No one to sue, only full metal first amendment rules apply.
facebook and google probably survive by having enormous and costly moderation facilities.
If there were no section 230, I imagine stacker news would have to take on a heavy hand in moderation.
Notice that the techdirt article doesn't even consider the possibility of publishing content without a comemecial platform. I guess nostr / usenet / or publish on a website you own, is such a niche concept it doesn't even deserve a mention in this context.
It's like we have become so dependent on big tech we lost the ability to even imagine alternatives or remember how things worked and people communicated in the living past. 1997 isn'r that long ago. We had internet and everything. (◔_◔)
It's time to recover our imagination.
the ruling didn't go far enough.
repeal section 230 of telecommunications act and watch sanity return to america.