this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
1012 points (98.0% liked)

Technology

59673 readers
3300 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] deweydecibel@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Attempts to moderate away the worst examples of it just result in people making variations that don't technically violate the rules.

The problem then becomes if the clearly defined rules aren't enough, then the people that run these sites need to start making individual judgment calls based on...well, their gut, really. And that creates a lot of issues if the site in question could be held accountable for making a poor call or overlooking something.

The threat of legal repercussions hanging over them is going to make them default to the most strict actions, and that's kind of a problem if there isn't a clear definition of what things need to be actioned against.

[–] rambaroo@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 8 months ago

Bullshit. There's no slippery slope here. You act like these social media companies just stumbled onto algorithms. They didn't, they designed these intentionally to drive engagement up.

Demanding that they change their algorithms to stop intentionally driving negativity and extremism isn't dystopian at all, and it's very frustrating that you think it is. If you choose to do nothing about this issue I promise you we'll be living in a fascist nation within 10 years, and it won't be an accident.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 1 points 8 months ago

this is exactly why section 230 exists. sites aren't responsible for what other people post and they are allowed to moderate however they want.

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It's the chilling effect they use in China, don't make it clear what will get you in trouble and then people are too scared to say anything

Just another group looking to control expression by the back door

[–] rambaroo@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

There's nothing ambiguous about this. Give me a break. We're demanding that social media companies stop deliberately driving negativity and extremism to get clicks. This has fuck all to do with free speech. What they're doing isn't "free speech", it's mass manipulation, and it's very deliberate. And it isn't disclosed to users at any point, which also makes it fraudulent.

It's incredibly ironic that you're accusing people of an effort to control expression when that's literally what social media has been doing since the beginning. They're the ones trying to turn the world into a dystopia, not the other way around.