2 ms·
It would make sense to combine these ideas with a circuit breaker that only kicks in once you have a certain MAU count. Having it apply to every forum everywhe
by Karunamon 6y ago
It would make sense to combine these ideas with a circuit breaker that only kicks in once you have a certain MAU count.
Having it apply to every forum everywhere would suck and be unworkable, but once you're at Facebook/Twitter/Reddit/etc. levels of exposure, there are a different set of interests and responsibilities to society in play.
- tptacek 6y agoYou seem to be describing a scheme where Twitter is legally required to be very careful about moderation, but Parler isn't, which seems crazy to me. Also, it doesn't address other vehicles for suppressing toxic speech; for instance, no 230 change you come up with is going to obligate cloud providers to do business with Parler and StormFront. I should add a point I should have made earlier, which is that 230 is in no way based on a notion of being "publishers" or "platforms". That's a super common misconception about the law.
- Karunamon 6y agoNot at all. In my ideal world, Parler would have the same restrictions applied, and would have fallen afoul of point 4 at the very least, given their massive popularity spike. They also weren't completely hands off, so the last option is off the table for them. That ambiguity is precisely what I try to address. That distinction might not exist now, but it arguably should.