5 ms·
It's eye opening watching these massive government organizations going after the only platform that has open sourced their algorithm and has publicly revealed t
by hersko 3y ago
It's eye opening watching these massive government organizations going after the only platform that has open sourced their algorithm and has publicly revealed the massive governmental overreach in a social media company.
- chickchick 3y ago[dead]
- Moldoteck 3y agoI may be wrong, but wasn't published algorithm an older version compared to what they actually used at that time?
- lm28469 3y agoThe open sourced the shell of the logic, the important bits are hidden in models they did not release
- invalidname 3y agoThey're going after mastodon? X demonstrates plainly the importance of regulation.
- nradov 3y agoWhy is regulation important?
- invalidname 3y agoBecause it has becomes a haven for racism and misinformation. That ultimately risks lives as misinformation has real-world consequences.
- Spivak 3y agoWhen people say we're living in the information age it's not just some hokey platitude. The (amount, speed, distance) of information travel is something that's been thrust upon us and how we as a society deal with whatever happens as a consequence is something that's still in its infancy. The phrase "sticks and stones" was coined in 1844 when by all reasonable account words has a real tangible limit on how much they could follow and hurt you.
- commandlinefan 3y agoEven if I agreed with you (that "racism and misinformation" were reasonable grounds for censorship), we've seen again and again, every single time, that when racism and misinformation become justification for censorship, the scope of "racism and misinformation" immediately grows to encompass whatever happens to be out of fashion right now - subject to change as styles and opinions change. In this case, it's grown to encompass evidence of war crimes.
- invalidname 3y agoIt's a delicate balance. I'm very much for freedom of speech. But it's a problem in the modern age. People use it for effectively disabling speech by using a denial of service attack through buckets of misinformation. E.g. a ridiculously corrupt official just spewing misinformation about his rivals to avoid accountability. In the past the press would have been a barrier. Nixon tried to do that and failed. Misinformation can drown out legitimate information in this situation. We need safeguards to stop that. It's super easy to see when looking at pre-Musk Twitter and the current state of X. Old twitter had terrible people on it. No doubt. The volume is now unbearable. Those facts are proven statistically and are plain to see... Free speech is a tool that was invented in the age of the quill. We curtailed it in the past e.g. fire in a crowded theater, copyrights and defamation. It needs additional stopgaps for the modern age. I understand the distrust in government, mine sucks... So I get that. It's a choice between bad and worse... (edited to fix a couple of grammar mistakes)
- nradov 3y ago
- throwaway45812 3y agoThey're going after the more used and easier (centralized) target. X demonstrates plainly the importance of technological measures against government overreach.
- seydor 3y agothey re going after twitter because mastodon doesn't have a CEO and $$$
- invalidname 3y agoIt's regulators not lawsuits. They can regulate a federated network too. Whether they comply is a different matter.
- seydor 3y agoThe letter is from the EC , not from a regulator . I also don't like that it's attacking the messenger. Fake news have been circulated by large news networks recently (people don't believe what they see on twitter at face value, but they do when it's retweeted by reputable news sources)
- invalidname 3y agoLarge news organizations are accountable for this and print corrections on misinformation. People lost their jobs in the past... The scale between the misinformation there and in the general social network isn't really comparable.
- kyriakos 3y agoDSA applies to platforms of certain size and above
- lm28469 3y agoYou can create an open source website to hire hitmen and make $$$, it won't be any more legal than a closed source one
- sergiosgc 3y agoRead the letter. It has nothing to do with the algorithm. The EU Commission couldn't care less about the algorithm. It's about moderation procedures. It's about the absence of moderation, and the hellscape that fills that void.
- throwaway45812 3y agoIsn't that exactly the same thing? They go after the platform that revealed the government overreach for not doing enough of it.
- sergiosgc 3y agoPreventing the current state of disinformation on Twitter is hardly overreach.
- throwaway45812 3y agoWhat will you do when enough users move to federated/decentralized platforms?
- sergiosgc 3y agoI expect the EU commission to direct their requests at the publisher. I expect publishers to respond. In short, business as usual. Federation of publishers doesn't change anything in that regard.
- petre 3y agoAs far as the EU is concerned, TwitterX is the publisher. You can't possibly expect them to go after publishers of state sponsored propaganda or jihadi movement recruting content, it's unproductive.
- throwaway45812 3y agoYou expect them to deal with tens of thousands of "publishers" (self-hosted users)?