6 ms·

The two beliefs are mutually exclusive. If you support social-networks removing what they decide is 'disinformation' by implication you think this is the bigger

by ajxs 6y ago

The two beliefs are mutually exclusive. If you support social-networks removing what they decide is 'disinformation' by implication you think this is the bigger risk. This is the mechanism by which they become the gatekeepers of information.

tshaddox 6y ago
Not at all mutually exclusive. Whether Facebook removes disinformation does not affect how much power Facebook has to distribute information.
- webmaven 6y ago
  > Not at all mutually exclusive. Whether Facebook removes disinformation does not affect how much power Facebook has to distribute information. While not mutually exclusive, it is clear that the importance of Facebook removing disinformation is linked proportionally to the power Facebook has to distribute information. The less power Facebook has, the less important it becomes that they, in particular, remove disinformation. The more power Facebook has, the more they become a disinformation SPOF.
  - tshaddox 6y ago
    > it is clear that the importance of Facebook removing disinformation is linked proportionally to the power Facebook has to distribute information Yes, but not proportionally to the power Facebook should have to distribute information.
    - webmaven 6y ago
      > Yes, but not proportionally to the power Facebook should have to distribute information. Well, yes, though arguments can be made as to whether the two are orthogonal, or if the relationship is an inverse linear one, or something more complex (I'd lean toward an S-curve and that we're currently in the middle of it).
ece 6y ago
I can support CDA 230 (which levels the playing field for startups and large social networks) and call for better moderation everywhere, your view precludes me from calling for better moderation, when in fact it's been a primary goal of CDA 230 all along. It's really just as simple as do you support CDA 230 or not? Anti-trust concerns are a different conversation, where there should be strong enforcement too.

by ajxs 6y ago

tshaddox 6y ago

Not at all mutually exclusive. Whether Facebook removes disinformation does not affect how much power Facebook has to distribute information.

webmaven 6y ago
> Not at all mutually exclusive. Whether Facebook removes disinformation does not affect how much power Facebook has to distribute information. While not mutually exclusive, it is clear that the importance of Facebook removing disinformation is linked proportionally to the power Facebook has to distribute information. The less power Facebook has, the less important it becomes that they, in particular, remove disinformation. The more power Facebook has, the more they become a disinformation SPOF.
- tshaddox 6y ago
  > it is clear that the importance of Facebook removing disinformation is linked proportionally to the power Facebook has to distribute information Yes, but not proportionally to the power Facebook should have to distribute information.
  - webmaven 6y ago
    > Yes, but not proportionally to the power Facebook should have to distribute information. Well, yes, though arguments can be made as to whether the two are orthogonal, or if the relationship is an inverse linear one, or something more complex (I'd lean toward an S-curve and that we're currently in the middle of it).

ece 6y ago

I can support CDA 230 (which levels the playing field for startups and large social networks) and call for better moderation everywhere, your view precludes me from calling for better moderation, when in fact it's been a primary goal of CDA 230 all along. It's really just as simple as do you support CDA 230 or not? Anti-trust concerns are a different conversation, where there should be strong enforcement too.