5 ms·

>Called the SAFE TECH Act, the bill would mark the latest effort to make social media companies like Alphabet Inc’s Google, Twitter Inc and Facebook Inc more ac

>Called the SAFE TECH Act, the bill would mark the latest effort to make social media companies like Alphabet Inc’s Google, Twitter Inc and Facebook Inc more accountable for “enabling cyber-stalking, targeted harassment, and discrimination on their platforms,” Senators Mark Warner, Mazie Hirono and Amy Klobuchar said in a statement. Ehh. Slippery slope theory, if you don't want to be subject to these behaviors don't use social media. While a good bar tender will cut off patrons who are clearly drunk, if you then hop in your truck and run into a tree, you can't sue the bar.

yladiz 6y ago
> if you then hop in your truck and run into a tree, you can't sue the bar Actually I don't think that's entirely true. I'm pretty sure there are laws in some places that if the bar knows a person is drunk and knows that they will drive, and does not prevent it, then the bar or the bartender (or both) can be held liable if the person then gets into an accident.
- sharemywin 6y ago
  CRIMINAL PENALTIES The Liquor Control Act prohibits alcoholic liquor permittees or their employees from selling or delivering alcohol to intoxicated persons (CGS § 30-86(b)(1)). Although the statute does not define "intoxicated persons," the Connecticut Supreme Court held in 1937 that someone can conclude that a defendant is intoxicated if he or she is staggering and not able to run very well (State v. Katz, 122 Conn. 439). Violations are punishable by up to a $1,000 fine, up to one year imprisonment, or both, for each offense
- rhcom2 6y ago
  Known as "Dram shop laws": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_shop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_shop
23B1 6y ago
> if you don't want to be subject to these behaviors don't use social media It is nearly impossible to engage in modern democracy without engaging in social media. I'm not saying this isn't a slippery slope, but when the only way to participate in our economy and government is online... well, there's a general public good element that needs to be considered by society. I'm not a big fan of government regulation, but the socials clearly aren't going to do it fairly.
- reaperducer 6y ago
  It is nearly impossible to engage in modern democracy without engaging in social media. I think you're using too broad a definition of "nearly." Aside from HN, and the occasional write-only rant on Twitter, I do not use social media. And have never used it in any way to keep in touch with my government. And I'm not alone. There are millions of people in the United States and hundreds of millions of people around the world who do not use social media.
asah 6y ago
It's worth a google search before claiming this: https://www.google.com/search?q=bars+held+responsible+for+drunk+driving https://www.google.com/search?q=bars+held+responsible+for+dr... https://www.google.com/search?q=dram+shop+laws https://www.google.com/search?q=dram+shop+laws "A commercial establishment may be held legally responsible for over-serving a visibly intoxicated person, or for serving alcohol to a minor, when that individual causes death or injury after leaving the establishment and causing: A motor vehicle accident, A pedestrian accident, Assault or other physical altercations, Other events leading to someone else's injury or death"
- offtop5 6y ago
  You can be too drunk to drive without being visibly intoxicated. Regardless the impetus is on the individual to take an Uber to the bar if they plan on drinking.
xpe 6y ago
Re: "if you don't want to be subject to these behaviors don't use social media" This specific argument is weak, _and_ the form of the argument is weak. I suggest you look for better argumentation. Your argument suggests that not 'using' social media frees a person from all of the effects of social media. That is oversimplified and untrue. It does not address the connectedness of people and culture, for one. I'll use two examples to explain. 1. Your argument takes the same form as the following argument: "if you don't want to be run over by a drunk driver, don't drive". Tell that to a pedestrian who was killed by a drunk driver. 2. Social Media is not like Vegas. What you say on Social Media does not stay on Social Media. It has lots of spillover effects.

yladiz 6y ago

> if you then hop in your truck and run into a tree, you can't sue the bar Actually I don't think that's entirely true. I'm pretty sure there are laws in some places that if the bar knows a person is drunk and knows that they will drive, and does not prevent it, then the bar or the bartender (or both) can be held liable if the person then gets into an accident.

sharemywin 6y ago
CRIMINAL PENALTIES The Liquor Control Act prohibits alcoholic liquor permittees or their employees from selling or delivering alcohol to intoxicated persons (CGS § 30-86(b)(1)). Although the statute does not define "intoxicated persons," the Connecticut Supreme Court held in 1937 that someone can conclude that a defendant is intoxicated if he or she is staggering and not able to run very well (State v. Katz, 122 Conn. 439). Violations are punishable by up to a $1,000 fine, up to one year imprisonment, or both, for each offense
rhcom2 6y ago
Known as "Dram shop laws": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_shop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dram_shop

23B1 6y ago

> if you don't want to be subject to these behaviors don't use social media It is nearly impossible to engage in modern democracy without engaging in social media. I'm not saying this isn't a slippery slope, but when the only way to participate in our economy and government is online... well, there's a general public good element that needs to be considered by society. I'm not a big fan of government regulation, but the socials clearly aren't going to do it fairly.

reaperducer 6y ago
It is nearly impossible to engage in modern democracy without engaging in social media. I think you're using too broad a definition of "nearly." Aside from HN, and the occasional write-only rant on Twitter, I do not use social media. And have never used it in any way to keep in touch with my government. And I'm not alone. There are millions of people in the United States and hundreds of millions of people around the world who do not use social media.

asah 6y ago

It's worth a google search before claiming this: https://www.google.com/search?q=bars+held+responsible+for+drunk+driving https://www.google.com/search?q=bars+held+responsible+for+dr... https://www.google.com/search?q=dram+shop+laws https://www.google.com/search?q=dram+shop+laws "A commercial establishment may be held legally responsible for over-serving a visibly intoxicated person, or for serving alcohol to a minor, when that individual causes death or injury after leaving the establishment and causing: A motor vehicle accident, A pedestrian accident, Assault or other physical altercations, Other events leading to someone else's injury or death"

offtop5 6y ago
You can be too drunk to drive without being visibly intoxicated. Regardless the impetus is on the individual to take an Uber to the bar if they plan on drinking.

xpe 6y ago

Re: "if you don't want to be subject to these behaviors don't use social media" This specific argument is weak, _and_ the form of the argument is weak. I suggest you look for better argumentation. Your argument suggests that not 'using' social media frees a person from all of the effects of social media. That is oversimplified and untrue. It does not address the connectedness of people and culture, for one. I'll use two examples to explain. 1. Your argument takes the same form as the following argument: "if you don't want to be run over by a drunk driver, don't drive". Tell that to a pedestrian who was killed by a drunk driver. 2. Social Media is not like Vegas. What you say on Social Media does not stay on Social Media. It has lots of spillover effects.