Battle for Section 230 - The Situation Monitoring Thread for Monitoring the Situation of the Situation Monitor's Situation Monitoring

I highly doubt that any 230 repeal will manage to make it through, for one reason: money. Billion dollar lobbying entities backed by google, facebook, et al will fight this tooth and nail, because even if this 230 repeal would benefit them int he short run by eliminating their competitors, they know that no modern internet company would survive. To avoid hundreds of lolsuits per day, youtube, facebook, twitter, ece would have to vet every single post, and that would be far too expensive to do, since you couldnt risk an AI fucking up and letting a post through. The highly mediated system would also obliterate engagement from users, dramatically reducing data collection, ad interaction, and overall income, along with halting the political power of these institutions. Even if the loss of money wouldnt didnt stop them,t he lost of political power would.

Both EARN IT and the alternatives would still give government power over these companies to hold them responsible, which still implies the above. Even if facebook followed along the "best practices" narrative, for instance, all it would take is one politician deciding to pick a bone with facebook on that board and Ol' Zucky would be in for a world of hurt.

Under the 230A protections, big internet companies can hide behind the shield of their token efforts. Replacing those efforts would be monumentally expensive, and they will fight these changes tooth and nail.

If they dont, well, it will likely be the end of the internet as we know it. Only megacorps with political power would survive, and then only by posting the most banal content. Normies would bore of it eventually, and the tech savvy would regress back to the era of BBS, where sites are hosted on individual computers or spread through torrent-style networks that are fly-by-night, disappearing at the first sign of legal threat.

EDIT: I'm sure someone will point out that the same lobby groups could buy out the 19 person EARN IT board. They could, but can you imagine the Facebook lobby-bought puppets trying to constantly fuck over the Google lobby-bought puppets? Or if Fox media grabbed a portion ofthe board and tried to use it to legislate facebook out of existence? This would be a recipe for political infighting, and that would still slow the giants to a crawl and open these companies up to lawsuits from any multitude of offended groups.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Coleslaw, The Last Stand, Draza and 29 others
DNA_JACKED said:
I highly doubt that any 230 repeal will manage to make it through, for one reason: money. Billion dollar lobbying entities backed by google, facebook, et al will fight this tooth and nail, because even if this 230 repeal would benefit them int he short run by eliminating their competitors, they know that no modern internet company would survive. To avoid hundreds of lolsuits per day, youtube, facebook, twitter, ece would have to vet every single post, and that would be far too expensive to do, since you couldnt risk an AI fucking up and letting a post through. The highly mediated system would also obliterate engagement from users, dramatically reducing data collection, ad interaction, and overall income, along with halting the political power of these institutions. Even if the loss of money wouldnt didnt stop them,t he lost of political power would.

Both EARN IT and the alternatives would still give government power over these companies to hold them responsible, which still implies the above. Even if facebook followed along the "best practices" narrative, for instance, all it would take is one politician deciding to pick a bone with facebook on that board and Ol' Zucky would be in for a world of hurt.

Under the 230A protections, big internet companies can hide behind the shield of their token efforts. Replacing those efforts would be monumentally expensive, and they will fight these changes tooth and nail.

If they dont, well, it will likely be the end of the internet as we know it. Only megacorps with political power would survive, and then only by posting the most banal content. Normies would bore of it eventually, and the tech savvy would regress back to the era of BBS, where sites are hosted on individual computers or spread through torrent-style networks that are fly-by-night, disappearing at the first sign of legal threat.
Click to expand...
How does Europe manage? Don't they already have very similar laws?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: MarvinTheParanoidAndroid
Null said:
It's never coming. The problem is the banks. It is always the banks. No representative or senator since JFK has wanted to touch the banks and force them to treat people fairly.
Click to expand...

JOSHUA MOON is NAZBOL

1590856196829.png
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Coleslaw, Gatdam Animal Person, GigaKike and 15 others
mindlessobserver said:
I am honestly not optimistic. Everyone in DC knows something needs to be done about Big Tech, but they can't agree on what. Which means they will need to compromise, and the very first thing Congress compromises on is the citizens individual interests.
Click to expand...

Ultimately, whatever winds up happening, I very much doubt maximizing free speech is going to be the priority of either party. Which is...troubling, to say the least.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: albertbrown26, MarvinTheParanoidAndroid, Slutpuppies and 5 others
Solid Hyrax said:
And the most horrible thing is, there's no backlash to this, because this is all under the pretense of protecting free speech, when it does the complete opposite
Click to expand...

Exactly. I think people need to realize that without Section 230, the internet would lose the main reason it became such a popular and widespread form of entertainment media in the first place: User-created content. Do television and radio let Joe Sixpack from East Bumblefuck, Iowa show off something he made so people halfway across the world can enjoy it? No, but the internet does.

Without Section 230, letting users contribute their own content would simply be to much of a liability. The internet would just become Television 2.0, with all the content created by a handful of mega-corporations with teams of lawyers at their disposal.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Coleslaw, Draza, Alex Krycek and 11 others
DNA_JACKED said:
I highly doubt that any 230 repeal will manage to make it through, for one reason: money. Billion dollar lobbying entities backed by google, facebook, et al will fight this tooth and nail, because even if this 230 repeal would benefit them int he short run by eliminating their competitors, they know that no modern internet company would survive. To avoid hundreds of lolsuits per day, youtube, facebook, twitter, ece would have to vet every single post, and that would be far too expensive to do, since you couldnt risk an AI fucking up and letting a post through. The highly mediated system would also obliterate engagement from users, dramatically reducing data collection, ad interaction, and overall income, along with halting the political power of these institutions. Even if the loss of money wouldnt didnt stop them,t he lost of political power would.

Both EARN IT and the alternatives would still give government power over these companies to hold them responsible, which still implies the above. Even if facebook followed along the "best practices" narrative, for instance, all it would take is one politician deciding to pick a bone with facebook on that board and Ol' Zucky would be in for a world of hurt.

Under the 230A protections, big internet companies can hide behind the shield of their token efforts. Replacing those efforts would be monumentally expensive, and they will fight these changes tooth and nail.

If they dont, well, it will likely be the end of the internet as we know it. Only megacorps with political power would survive, and then only by posting the most banal content. Normies would bore of it eventually, and the tech savvy would regress back to the era of BBS, where sites are hosted on individual computers or spread through torrent-style networks that are fly-by-night, disappearing at the first sign of legal threat.

EDIT: I'm sure someone will point out that the same lobby groups could buy out the 19 person EARN IT board. They could, but can you imagine the Facebook lobby-bought puppets trying to constantly fuck over the Google lobby-bought puppets? Or if Fox media grabbed a portion ofthe board and tried to use it to legislate facebook out of existence? This would be a recipe for political infighting, and that would still slow the giants to a crawl and open these companies up to lawsuits from any multitude of offended groups.
Click to expand...
I concur. At this point, I think Jack has Trump over a barrel, and Trump knows it, which is why he's engaging in a little saber-rattling. If Trump gets what he wants and repeals 230, Jack can go "So we're a publisher, which means we decide which views to host!" and initiate a digital purge of Twitter users to the right of Marx. If Trump loses, it's back to the status quo.
At the same time, I'm kinda rooting for Trump to get his revenge without jeopardizing free speech. After everything it's done, Twitter richly deserves to have its chickens come home to roost.
 
  • Like
  • Feels
  • DRINK!
Reactions: Fentanyl Crop Duster, Alex Krycek, albertbrown26 and 5 others
Sexy Senior Citizen said:
I concur. At this point, I think Jack has Trump over a barrel, and Trump knows it, which is why he's engaging in a little saber-rattling. If Trump gets what he wants and repeals 230, Jack can go "So we're a publisher, which means we decide which views to host!" and initiate a digital purge of Twitter users to the right of Marx. If Trump loses, it's back to the status quo.
At the same time, I'm kinda rooting for Trump to get his revenge without jeopardizing free speech. After everything it's done, Twitter richly deserves to have its chickens come home to roost.
Click to expand...
Trump wont get anything. We've seen the bills being made in response to this, and they would fuck up everything. Even the best one is absolute trash.

The problem with saber rattling is eventually you'll need to back up that saber. That rarely goes well.
6MillionBicycles said:
It’s becoming that anyways. If it has not already been that for a decade.
Click to expand...
An organically changing internet may have been progressing towards this, but that gave time for the internet to adapt. Look at all Null has done over the years to keep Kiwifarms up and running. If he had been hit with all those challenges at once back when Kiwifarms was in its infancy, would this site have survived?

Under the new laws, anything that isnt a google, facebook, twitter, ece sanctioned site would disappear. No more 4chan, no more kiwifarms, no more comments on websites that go against whatever narrative those sites push.
 
  • Agree
  • Horrifying
Reactions: Draza, Alex Krycek, MarvinTheParanoidAndroid and 8 others
DNA_JACKED said:
An organically changing internet may have been progressing towards this, but that gave time for the internet to adapt. Look at all Null has done over the years to keep Kiwifarms up and running. If he had been hit with all those challenges at once back when Kiwifarms was in its infancy, would this site have survived?

Under the new laws, anything that isnt a google, facebook, twitter, ece sanctioned site would disappear. No more 4chan, no more kiwifarms, no more comments on websites that go against whatever narrative those sites push.
Click to expand...

I would argue the internet has not been organic for quite sometime. Regardless you are right about time to adopt. But that's more a byproduct of things being smoother if done over time.

Even in 1984 you are allowed your small spaces of dissent.
 
  • Disagree
  • Autistic
Reactions: Jhonson Jhonson, MarvinTheParanoidAndroid and Aurora
Regulating the banks is an absolute pipe dream on two fronts in the current US political climate.

1) Muh Private Company conservatives and so on will bend over backwards

2) Everyone else will go "what about the terrorisms"

Honestly there is absolutely no hope on that front.

As for Section 230... maybe, just maybe, Twitter can realize they are playing with fire by fucking with the political speech of the President of the United States, and back down? Perhaps? I would say the same thing if they had been doing this to Obama. It's just a stupid idea.
 
  • Optimistic
  • Feels
  • Dumb
Reactions: The Last Stand, King Buzzo, albertbrown26 and 6 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back