4 ms·

230 is going to get no-scoped by lawmakers. That's a wrap. https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/no-longer-acceptable-for-platforms-to-take-key-decision

230 is going to get no-scoped by lawmakers. That's a wrap. https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/no-longer-acceptable-for-platforms-to-take-key-decisions-alone-eu-commission-says/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/digital/news/no-longer-acce...

Kuraj 6y ago
What the hell does that mean?
- underyx 6y ago
  They were trying to say that they expect congress to amend or repeal Section 230, which protects content hosts from legal liability for content created by someone else.
- ekrebs 6y ago
  No-scope is a gaming term for sniping someone from a sniper rifle without zooming in using the scope. Very difficult to do, and this is a weird application of the phrase. 230 about to be “nuked” would probably be more applicable. It implies destroyed by pushing a button. No effort involved and immediate annihilation.
- dwardu 6y ago
  230 is getting no scoped, meaning no one will care about reforming it or even repealing it. Section 230 is an internet legislation that gives social media companies a pass on their users actions. E.g. if CNN/Fox/BBC publishes something fake on their website, as a publisher they will be legally liable to what they publish. If a user on facebook posts something similar then facebook wont get in trouble because they are not regarded as the publishers. It was created to help boost social media site momentum during the Obama administration. Now recently since facebook/twitter have been moving into becoming the arbiters of what is true and not which makes them publishers. From a fairness point of view, why should these social media sites benefit from section 230 while traditional media doesn't? EDIT: Added legality
- jshmrsn 6y ago
  I don’t want to add credence to such a poorly worded and misguided comment, but 230 is referring to Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934. No-scoped refers to killing something so quickly with a sniper rifle so fast you don’t even take the time to look through your scope (in first person shooter video games).
  - Kuraj 6y ago
    Thanks! It was the "230" I was drawing a blank on. As a non-American it's sometimes hard to keep up.
ekrebs 6y ago
I don’t understand this new fascination with gutting 230. 230 protects the speech of the users, since the platform isn’t held responsible for what they say. Make YouTube liable for its users content, and now the whole system is moderated to remove any polarizing content. This means politicians like Trump will NEVER have a platform for their message. Why would they intentionally vote to de-amplify their own voices?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- nobody9999 6y ago
  That's all true. But that's not the really bad part. Section 230 means that you can't be sued for something I say. But it doesn't just apply to FB and Twitter. It applies to HN. It applies to Github repos and Discord channels and every person and device connected to the Internet in the US. Get rid of Section 230 and then you can be sued for what other people say. Which would pretty much kill all but the biggest platforms, because only they could afford the liability. Section 230 has been protecting free speech on the Internet for 25 years. We should keep doing that. See here[0] for more details. The title is snarky, but it has lots of good information. [0] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello...

Kuraj 6y ago

What the hell does that mean?

underyx 6y ago
They were trying to say that they expect congress to amend or repeal Section 230, which protects content hosts from legal liability for content created by someone else.
ekrebs 6y ago
No-scope is a gaming term for sniping someone from a sniper rifle without zooming in using the scope. Very difficult to do, and this is a weird application of the phrase. 230 about to be “nuked” would probably be more applicable. It implies destroyed by pushing a button. No effort involved and immediate annihilation.
dwardu 6y ago
230 is getting no scoped, meaning no one will care about reforming it or even repealing it. Section 230 is an internet legislation that gives social media companies a pass on their users actions. E.g. if CNN/Fox/BBC publishes something fake on their website, as a publisher they will be legally liable to what they publish. If a user on facebook posts something similar then facebook wont get in trouble because they are not regarded as the publishers. It was created to help boost social media site momentum during the Obama administration. Now recently since facebook/twitter have been moving into becoming the arbiters of what is true and not which makes them publishers. From a fairness point of view, why should these social media sites benefit from section 230 while traditional media doesn't? EDIT: Added legality
jshmrsn 6y ago
I don’t want to add credence to such a poorly worded and misguided comment, but 230 is referring to Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934. No-scoped refers to killing something so quickly with a sniper rifle so fast you don’t even take the time to look through your scope (in first person shooter video games).
- Kuraj 6y ago
  Thanks! It was the "230" I was drawing a blank on. As a non-American it's sometimes hard to keep up.

ekrebs 6y ago

I don’t understand this new fascination with gutting 230. 230 protects the speech of the users, since the platform isn’t held responsible for what they say. Make YouTube liable for its users content, and now the whole system is moderated to remove any polarizing content. This means politicians like Trump will NEVER have a platform for their message. Why would they intentionally vote to de-amplify their own voices?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nobody9999 6y ago
That's all true. But that's not the really bad part. Section 230 means that you can't be sued for something I say. But it doesn't just apply to FB and Twitter. It applies to HN. It applies to Github repos and Discord channels and every person and device connected to the Internet in the US. Get rid of Section 230 and then you can be sued for what other people say. Which would pretty much kill all but the biggest platforms, because only they could afford the liability. Section 230 has been protecting free speech on the Internet for 25 years. We should keep doing that. See here[0] for more details. The title is snarky, but it has lots of good information. [0] https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200531/23325444617/hello...