3 ms·

> That outcome doesn't sound like the outcome you're saying you may be comfortable with. Oh no, I'm considering exactly that. I am saying: if my tiny personal

> That outcome doesn't sound like the outcome you're saying you may be comfortable with. Oh no, I'm considering exactly that. I am saying: if my tiny personal blog has a comment section I would be liable for comments posted there. If that is a burden I can't handle then I should turn off comments. At least in my experience those comment sections are a complete waste of space anyway and the trend I've noticed from the large blogs that are still around (e.g. daringfireball, kottke) is that their comment sections are long gone anyway. What I am pondering is: would this ruin the Internet? If I couldn't host a public forum if it got beyond my limited means to moderate? If I couldn't have a public comment section? It doesn't seem clear to me the Internet breaks if I am forced to own the responsibility for those things that I allow to be made public through sites I control.

malwrar 6y ago
> What I am pondering is: would this ruin the Internet? If I couldn't host a public forum if it got beyond my limited means to moderate? Do you actually have the means to moderate your forum and fund the legal trouble you might face should you get it wrong? Are you ready for the bad actors who abuse this bottleneck to take down content they don't like? I don't think many people are positioned to handle these burdens, and I think the internet will be ruined as a result.
davorak 6y ago
> What I am pondering is: would this ruin the Internet? It would break most of how the internet works today. It would prevent most forms of real time, one to many, communication since a human would first have to moderate it. Best example is public audio/video conferencing. I watched a conference presentation in real time today, which had real time comments in IRC and an audio/video conference question and answer. Neither of which would have been possible if real time moderation was required. How would moderation even work for audio/video conferences? As far as I can tell it would not work since no moderation could happen in real time and allow for smooth audio/video conferencing. What if we act as a platform though and claim no responsibility for the content that happens? Then there is no ability to set topics or restrict offensive material etc so any random person(or bot since how would you tell the difference) could streaming in offensive videos or loud noise Loosing most, one to many, real time communication would be throwing out a considerable amount of value. Do you have solutions for issues like that? edit clarifying that I am taling about one to many real time communication.
- reggieband 6y ago
  > How would moderation even work for audio/video conferences? This is already an issue on platforms like Twitch. All Twitch streamers are required by the Twitch ToS to moderate their chats and the streamers face bans if they fail to do so. Everyone keeps talking about "breaking" the Internet but let's consider what would actually change. Let's say that I am unable to moderate my chat because it is overrun with malicious actors. What are my options? I can completely turn off chat for one. I could restrict chat to a manageable vetted subset of chatters that I am comfortable allowing to post with minimal moderation. In fact, as a streamer I cannot possibly read hundreds or thousands of messages per second. At that point the very idea there is "real time communication" going on is a myth anyway. Every streamer has a way of limiting this deluge of input and moderation is how they are handling it. > Loosing most, one to many, real time communication would be throwing out a considerable amount of value. This is where I feel everyone here is taking things too far. You don't lose communication - you become responsible for the communication you allow to be made pubic.
  - davorak 6y ago
    > This is already an issue on platforms like Twitch. All Twitch streamers are required by the Twitch ToS to moderate their chats and the streamers face bans if they fail to do so. Currently twitch is not held legally responsible if the streamers fail to follow ToS due to Section 230. If Section 230 was dropped however asking the streamers to moderate would not protect them from legal consequences. I do not see how twitch's current rules would provide them legal protection or provide a solution for moderation of one to many realtime communication if Section 230 was dropped. Maybe you have some assumptions about how new laws would be put in place post Section 230 that make this work? > This is where I feel everyone here is taking things too far. You don't lose communication - you become responsible for the communication you allow to be made pubic. It increases the barrier to entry so many, if not most, forms of one to many real time communication would have to be discontinued due to lack of the ability to moderate in real time. Hence they would be lost along with the value they generate.
    - reggieband 6y ago

malwrar 6y ago

> What I am pondering is: would this ruin the Internet? If I couldn't host a public forum if it got beyond my limited means to moderate? Do you actually have the means to moderate your forum and fund the legal trouble you might face should you get it wrong? Are you ready for the bad actors who abuse this bottleneck to take down content they don't like? I don't think many people are positioned to handle these burdens, and I think the internet will be ruined as a result.

davorak 6y ago

> What I am pondering is: would this ruin the Internet? It would break most of how the internet works today. It would prevent most forms of real time, one to many, communication since a human would first have to moderate it. Best example is public audio/video conferencing. I watched a conference presentation in real time today, which had real time comments in IRC and an audio/video conference question and answer. Neither of which would have been possible if real time moderation was required. How would moderation even work for audio/video conferences? As far as I can tell it would not work since no moderation could happen in real time and allow for smooth audio/video conferencing. What if we act as a platform though and claim no responsibility for the content that happens? Then there is no ability to set topics or restrict offensive material etc so any random person(or bot since how would you tell the difference) could streaming in offensive videos or loud noise Loosing most, one to many, real time communication would be throwing out a considerable amount of value. Do you have solutions for issues like that? edit clarifying that I am taling about one to many real time communication.

reggieband 6y ago
> How would moderation even work for audio/video conferences? This is already an issue on platforms like Twitch. All Twitch streamers are required by the Twitch ToS to moderate their chats and the streamers face bans if they fail to do so. Everyone keeps talking about "breaking" the Internet but let's consider what would actually change. Let's say that I am unable to moderate my chat because it is overrun with malicious actors. What are my options? I can completely turn off chat for one. I could restrict chat to a manageable vetted subset of chatters that I am comfortable allowing to post with minimal moderation. In fact, as a streamer I cannot possibly read hundreds or thousands of messages per second. At that point the very idea there is "real time communication" going on is a myth anyway. Every streamer has a way of limiting this deluge of input and moderation is how they are handling it. > Loosing most, one to many, real time communication would be throwing out a considerable amount of value. This is where I feel everyone here is taking things too far. You don't lose communication - you become responsible for the communication you allow to be made pubic.
- davorak 6y ago
  > This is already an issue on platforms like Twitch. All Twitch streamers are required by the Twitch ToS to moderate their chats and the streamers face bans if they fail to do so. Currently twitch is not held legally responsible if the streamers fail to follow ToS due to Section 230. If Section 230 was dropped however asking the streamers to moderate would not protect them from legal consequences. I do not see how twitch's current rules would provide them legal protection or provide a solution for moderation of one to many realtime communication if Section 230 was dropped. Maybe you have some assumptions about how new laws would be put in place post Section 230 that make this work? > This is where I feel everyone here is taking things too far. You don't lose communication - you become responsible for the communication you allow to be made pubic. It increases the barrier to entry so many, if not most, forms of one to many real time communication would have to be discontinued due to lack of the ability to moderate in real time. Hence they would be lost along with the value they generate.
  - reggieband 6y ago