banads

22 ms·

271.
by banads 7y ago
>Companies moderating speech on their services is time tested Not at FBs scale
272.
by banads 7y ago
I like this idea. Another feature that could be helpful for users who are eary of group think thought bubbles is to have some kind of analytics on the most common types of words, phrases, and topics that the moderator censors.
273.
by banads 7y ago
Better long term odds than having 1,500 people do it for 321,000,000 (MAU)
274.
by banads 7y ago
Good, then people will be more inclined towards independent critical thinking
275.
by banads 7y ago
>How is decentralized twitter supposed to solve misinformation? How is this not a laughable expectation? You may as well expect them to "solve evil".
276.
by banads 7y ago
People should attack the ideas that people have, not attack the people for having ideas. Theres a huge difference between expressing disagreement with an idea and trying to ruin someone's life.
277.
by banads 7y ago
>These are different issues with different levels of severity and different solutions. All of these issues are rooted in the same principle, namely: allowing people to freely express themselves in the face of authority is a net good for
278.
by banads 7y ago
Depends on if you think people have any free will or ability to think for themselves
279.
by banads 7y ago
Apples to oranges. King was fighting against non technical, publicly understood, explicit interpretations of laws carried out by local/state police. Snowden was/is fighting against secret interpretations of laws dealing with high
280.
by banads 7y ago
>The US has already done about all it can to regulate cars to maximize safety. Halving speed limits on highways and interstates would save many lives. But we'd prefer to "move fast and break things"
281.
by banads 7y ago
What is your point? Everyone knows cars and guns are designed differently. Seems like you are trying to rationalize irrational terror. Statistics show a student should logically be more wary of dying in a car wreck on the drive to/from