3 ms·
We need a way to filter out the low utility or information sites that are only there for SEO, marketing or even misinformation. And we need to do so without cen
by robnado 3y ago
We need a way to filter out the low utility or information sites that are only there for SEO, marketing or even misinformation. And we need to do so without censoring. This is a wicked problem[0] to solve, but one worth tackling explicitly as a society. Otherwise, the first mover gets to decide what deserves censorship and gets to control public speech.
My modest proposal: an internet constitution or bill of rights that solidify the right to free speech online as well as a court system to enforce and disambiguate the rules. Following this you have laws against fake reviews (basically fraud), and allow court cases when harm is caused by knowingly false information. Then, for the blogspam and AI generated stuff, you let jurisprudence and representative democracy decide how to tackle this.
What about all the cost of this? Honestly, it might be worth it considering the importance of the internet today.
[0]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem
- throwuwu 3y agoWay too overcomplicated and authoritarian. The reason why the old internet was good was because it had both a high barrier to entry and a low perceived utility for commercial exploitation. Gemini gets it right by just starting over and limiting their protocol to prevent general appeal and exploitation. https://gemini.circumlunar.space/ https://gemini.circumlunar.space/
- robnado 3y agoThere is already authoritarian control of the internet going on. I believe the solution is to make this control of the internet explicit, transparent and have the people be able to influence it. Of course, there is nothing wrong with starting your own version of the World Wide Web and that’s definitely also part of the solution.
- throwuwu 3y agoRoute around the problem