"Mad at the Internet" - a/k/a My Psychotherapy Sessions

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
No stream
nostream.png
 
  • Feels
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Local Fed, PhoBingas, Optantrix and 34 others
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Nonconsentual Pronouns, Irene and 22 others, Mr Bones Wild Ride and 5 others
WelperHelper99 said:
@Null you might want to see this


Tl:biggrin:r YouTube, Reddit, Meta, and 4chan are in a lawsuit now because of the Buffalo mass shooter. Section 230 is fucking dead.
Click to expand...
Section 230 is still in place, I think their argument is that the algorithm that highlights/pushes similar content toward you could violate the idea of not being responsible for any views or opinions being shown. These sites aren't responsible for the content, but perhaps they're responsible for pushing you down a rabbit hole you might not have gone on if you were just searching for it all manually?

Like imagine you watch a "troons owned" video, and all the recommended videos are are about supporting trans rights. The site itself hasn't posted any videos or content supporting a particular view, but the algorithm would be trying to nudge you in a certain ideological direction, wouldn't it?

Everyone knows these sites' algorithms are shit and manipulative. Imagine if they had to stop doing that and could only show actual search results and "most recent from creators you follow."

I don't know if this is ultimately a good or bad idea. If nothing else, if it's a bad idea, then a day in court might also just reiterate and further solidify 230.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: deadtofaunus, PhoBingas, Nonconsentual Pronouns and 4 others
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Anonymus Fluhre, Nonconsentual Pronouns, "Not" Count Dankula and 1 other person
Runch said:
Section 230 is still in place, I think their argument is that the algorithm that highlights/pushes similar content toward you could violate the idea of not being responsible for any views or opinions being shown. These sites aren't responsible for the content, but perhaps they're responsible for pushing you down a rabbit hole you might not have gone on if you were just searching for it all manually?

Like imagine you watch a "troons owned" video, and all the recommended videos are are about supporting trans rights. The site itself hasn't posted any videos or content supporting a particular view, but the algorithm would be trying to nudge you in a certain ideological direction, wouldn't it?

Everyone knows these sites' algorithms are shit and manipulative. Imagine if they had to stop doing that and could only show actual search results and "most recent from creators you follow."

I don't know if this is ultimately a good or bad idea. If nothing else, if it's a bad idea, then a day in court might also just reiterate and further solidify 230.
Click to expand...
I could see the argument, I remember I once put some Nasa youtube video on while I was going to sleep one night. I had left youtube on autoplay though so it just kept going to the next recommended after each video was done. By the time I woke up it was playing flat earth theory videos.
 
  • Like
  • DRINK!
Reactions: scathefire, Nonconsentual Pronouns, beautiful person and 1 other person
WelperHelper99 said:
So basically since the algorithm pushes the "radicalized content", they are responsible is what is being argued?
Click to expand...
The algorithm is the sole creation of the platforms. It is their way of showing you what content it deems you need to see. The argument goes that this way the harm is not done by a third party (which doesn't even have any control over the algorithm), but by the platform itself. If memory serves, this is the first court that found that this argument had merit.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Kees H, WelperHelper99 and polar bear
Estate said:
View attachment 5831682
Pfft, the inability to speak, or even stay awake, has never stopped Ralph from doing a stream.
Ralphachads stay winning, Joshcels keep sneeding.
Click to expand...
josh could open the stream, say nothing for two hours, and rack in $1k in superchats

that he doesn't show some restraint, tbh
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: beautiful person, mrfresh, PhoBingas and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back