I'm reminded of the library of babel: an "infinite" library of every combination of characters. To write a book, all you have you do is "write" a book is find t

I'm reminded of the library of babel: an "infinite" library of every combination of characters. To write a book, all you have you do is "write" a book is find the correct one, already sitting on the shelf. If you consider that basically any opinion on a subject is recorded somewhere on YouTube, then YouTube doesn't have to "write" a thing. If they wanted to make a statement, all they have to do is sort the right thing to the top. I personally agree with section 230, but there's a fine line between curation and moderation, and it's difficult to square with the scale of the internet. There are approximately 500 hours of video uploaded every minute on YouTube. That's 30,000 every hour, or 720,000 hours every day. No matter how infinite YouTube's resources might be, there is simply no way to human moderate all of it. Do I think YouTube is toe-ing the line between moderation and curation effectively? Honestly, no. For myself, maybe, but not for the internet as a whole. But I don't think removing section 230 is the way to fix it.