3 ms·
Some things are simply too destructive to be in society. I'll take smoking as an example: Of course you should have the option to put whatever you like into y
by CodeGlitch 6y ago
Some things are simply too destructive to be in society. I'll take smoking as an example: Of course you should have the option to put whatever you like into your body. But when it starts to seriously affect your health and the people around you, it calls into question whether your right to smoke is above the negative impact on society.
This is how I see social media. (I realise a lot of HN folk work in this area)
These CEOs brought social media into our world, and I expect them to take resposibility for it. If they are unwilling or unable to take responsibility, then I'm OK for The State to do that for them - like you said with regulations. Currently it looks like they don't want to take resposibility for the destruction they have caused.
Sorry for the rant - but I'm seeing first hand the negative effects of QAnon/Consipracy Theories/Extreme Politics within family members.
- procombo 6y agoI've recently conceded to the argument that it's impossible to solve the problem without first defining the role and function of the companies. I believe that should be at the center of Senate questioning, not because it's comfortable, but because it is necessary. I cooked eggs this morning. There is a diversity of wonderful eggs and even some bad eggs. Is the Twitter service a) the eggs, b) the pan, c) the stove, or d) the hen-to-table service of providing a delicious breakfast?