3 ms·
Meta Surrenders to the Right on Speech
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- gnabgib 2y agoLarge discussion about this yesterday (765 points, 1 day ago, 1259 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42621627 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42621627
- blackeyeblitzar 2y agoMore like it is surrendering on the right to speech, something we need to regulate large tech platforms into respecting in general (like the common carriers and utilities they are). I don’t trust Zuck’s motivation for making this change now, but it is still a very positive change after the long history of censorship and inaccurate/misleading fact checks on Meta owned platforms.
- verdverm 2y agoCommon carriers are like cable and phone companies because they literally have (had) a single wire running into the house. There was no choice, nor do they participate in the production or consumption of the data that goes over those lines. Social media companies are different. For one, there is user choice. I choose not to use Meta or Musk Social. I understand the "utility" aspect of social media for society, though I wonder how much utility it really provides. They also interact with the data to varying degrees. I think the issue we have is that we are trying to fit them into the existing utility vs publisher boxes when in reality they exist in a space in between these two. They really need to be decomposed and comply with a protocol, something like ATProto. A single social media fabric where users can choose data host, apps, moderation, and algorithmic feeds. A fabric where competition can exist because switching costs have been reduced or removed.