3 ms·

> Thanks to this law you can't be held liable if you have a blog with a comment section. Even absent a comment section, most blogs are hosted by someone else (

> Thanks to this law you can't be held liable if you have a blog with a comment section. Even absent a comment section, most blogs are hosted by someone else (e.g. WordPress), who does not vet the content on that blog. That won't be possible anymore in a post-Section 230 world.

NovemberWhiskey 6y ago
Right. So WordPress has no protections if you post bad content. So probably WordPress goes away. No problem, you say, I'll self-host my content on AWS and use CloudFlare as a CDN. But AWS and CF also have no section 230 protections any more either and probably won't do business with you unless you indemnify under some kind of insurance policy (which you won't be able to afford as a small blog). Even if you run your own server and install it at home, the lack of section 230 protections will probably make your ISP responsible for content you publish (remember: your ISP is not a common carrier - thanks FCC) so you're probably going to find that all consumer ISPs are going to have terms of service that prohibit publication, and technical implementations that enforce that. I mean, in the non-Internet world, if I want to make a newsletter and mail it out to a subscriber list; I can at least do that. All I need is a laser printer, and a stack of stamped envelopes. The postal service is a common carrier, at least. Today's internet is a composition of platforms, all of which are really only possible due to the existence of section 230. It blows my mind that people are so blasé about the idea of tossing it out or reworking it in a naive way.
- cbelton 6y ago
  Thank you for your final comment. As a lawyer, reading people's reactions to 230 repeal attempts (especially when it comes from educated engineers and technologists) is shocking. What is more astounding is that, for some reason, they seem convinced that this will take out FB/Google/Twitter, etc. where we have ample evidence that the opposite will occur, and they'll just become further entrenched platforms since they are the only ones that would have the financial capacity to continue running community based platforms effectively. I have yet to come across a strong argument for repeal that doesn't exacerbate the issues that repeal proponents purport to want to address.

NovemberWhiskey 6y ago

Right. So WordPress has no protections if you post bad content. So probably WordPress goes away. No problem, you say, I'll self-host my content on AWS and use CloudFlare as a CDN. But AWS and CF also have no section 230 protections any more either and probably won't do business with you unless you indemnify under some kind of insurance policy (which you won't be able to afford as a small blog). Even if you run your own server and install it at home, the lack of section 230 protections will probably make your ISP responsible for content you publish (remember: your ISP is not a common carrier - thanks FCC) so you're probably going to find that all consumer ISPs are going to have terms of service that prohibit publication, and technical implementations that enforce that. I mean, in the non-Internet world, if I want to make a newsletter and mail it out to a subscriber list; I can at least do that. All I need is a laser printer, and a stack of stamped envelopes. The postal service is a common carrier, at least. Today's internet is a composition of platforms, all of which are really only possible due to the existence of section 230. It blows my mind that people are so blasé about the idea of tossing it out or reworking it in a naive way.

cbelton 6y ago
Thank you for your final comment. As a lawyer, reading people's reactions to 230 repeal attempts (especially when it comes from educated engineers and technologists) is shocking. What is more astounding is that, for some reason, they seem convinced that this will take out FB/Google/Twitter, etc. where we have ample evidence that the opposite will occur, and they'll just become further entrenched platforms since they are the only ones that would have the financial capacity to continue running community based platforms effectively. I have yet to come across a strong argument for repeal that doesn't exacerbate the issues that repeal proponents purport to want to address.