4 ms·
I think Jack's model it would decrease the reach of illegal content, but it would still be accessible if you had a direct link.
by nathias 4y ago
I think Jack's model it would decrease the reach of illegal content, but it would still be accessible if you had a direct link.
- krapp 4y agoJack's model is that moderation should only occur due to algorithms - but algorithms in this context are designed to maximize engagement, which means maximizing the reach of "illegal" content, because controversy leads engagement. "algorithmic moderation" is a contradiction in terms, and counter to the incentives of social media. Although strictly illegal content is a red herring since not even most "free speech" platforms (not on the dark web) are willing to risk jail time for hosting content that explicitly breaks the law - certainly not Reddit. What we're really talking about is technically legal but still harmful content, although at the extreme I guess the free speech extremist position has to allow illegal content as well.
- consumer451 4y ago> Jack's model is that moderation should only occur due to algorithms This is super hand wavy on his part. [0] So algorithms just rise from the virgin snow having solved human philosophy and sorted all social norms? No humans were involved in the making of these algorithms? It's really hard to take a proposal seriously when it contains something like that. Please someone explain to me how I can NOT read it as: "Responsibility for the platform I created? No, no, I only chose the team who coded it and I only oversaw the creation of this magic algo. That absolves me of everything!" [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/ https://www.reddit.com/r/restofthefuckingowl/
- nathias 4y agoI find this type of harm reduction discourse really weasely, I imagine you have no problem with www and email, that are also such free sepeech exteremes that allow harmful content.