3 ms·

I'd really suggest you read this article to understand why he's already starting with little knowledge of how to begin solving the problems he claims to be impo

• EricE 4y ago
• SpicyLemonZest 4y ago
  I do wish he would engage a bit more with the "spam is legal" problem. But this article dismisses out of hand what I think is the key premise, that existing thought on content moderation has large, core components which are inimical to conservative thought. Kate Klonick's paper is great and I second the Techdirt guy's recommendation to read it, but it also reveals some pretty obvious blind spots. She approvingly describes a story where the Youtube content moderation team traveled to Thailand, and agreed to censor (with a geofence) gratuitous insults to their king. But it's hard to imagine they would have even considered this if, say, Alabamians wanted them to take down some blasphemous material. In another case, she mentions that "the video was restored once its political significance was understood", but have they ever made such an exception when it's significant towards political causes Youtube trust and safety team doesn't agree with?