Social media executive order comindy

[WVNed]

The ability for this site, and other non government sites, to censor based on whatever they like - no political or religious posts - for instance, may be effected.

No. It wont. For obvious reasons if you understood the issue.

Buy carry on and set your hair on fire and do what you usually do.

 

[WVNed]

I have posted in the thread. It can now be closed.

 

[EMeyer]

A platform that censors political messages based on their content cannot help but be biased. They always end up that way.

R2Rs policy of not allowing political discussion regardless of the content seems quite different and inherently unbiased...

My 2 cents

 

[kyleinpdx]

Nothing will happen. I repeat, nothing will happen...

This is the usual blow hard smoke screen tactics we've seen for years.

I'm confident nothing will happen because "the internet" doesn't care about the powers that be political desires or aspirations. So Trump thinks he can roll back the "Communications Decency Act" sure, if some how the majority of congress acted today (which will never happen) and ratified whatever changes Trump wants AND it isn't mired in legal challenges for years if not decades, it will take all of 12hrs to spin down any US based servers and spin them back up in Ireland. There is zero chance twitter plays ball because they don't have to. All of the big tech companies (some I have worked for personally) don't need nor care about borders, and they can easily be circumvented. The US is 10+ years behind the curve in terms of what China's got going on, there is no way that I am aware of where a US government agency could police internet traffic at the perimeter.

I tell all of my new technicians, "once you know the rules of the game, you can bend those rules to your will." Lets look at R2R, if Trump decided he hated saltwater aquaria and wanted to shut down R2R (my hope revhtree and the other have a good IT team) but if it were my project to run, we would effectively export the virtual disk that houses a good, recent database copy, rent out a VPS somewhere else in the world, spin up that exported system, make some DNS changes and be back in a few hours. It would be 10x easier if we were staying on the same platform. Take AWS or example, its trivial to change your point of presence from US West to UK Ireland, or almost any other country in the world.

If you have ever done anything with network security you know how much of a cat and mouse game it is, myself and two other dudes could easily stay ahead of the US government. Want an example, just look to the pirate bay, MEGA(upload) or any of the other services that governments have tried to take offline.

 

[Nootch]

Taking the political talk out of this for a second the best i can, i see this is a much different problem/solution...


Platform VS Publisher

Publishers - Monitor content placed on their site and take accountability for it. Are culpable for it, and can be sued over the content. IE NYT, WashPost, etc etc

Platform - Provide and area or service and do nothing to monitor or censor like a cell phone company.


When Twitter was acting like platform and having a blanket approach on all sides, it was fine. Decent common laws of conduct. When Twitter started having a bias in one direction, it started to act like a publisher. Being a publisher and favoring one way or the other comes with responsibility. This is the big problem. You can't ask for no culpability for what is said on your site, and then selectivity choose to silence and monitor specific groups of people.

**EDIT - spelling mistakes

 

[WVNed]

Taking the political talk out of this for a second the best i can, i see this is a much different problem/solution...


Platform VS Publisher

Publishers - Monitor content placed on their site and take accountability for it. Are culpable for it, and can be sued over the content. IE NYT, WashPost, etc etc

Platform - Provide and area or service and do nothing to monitor or censor like a cell phone company.


When Twitter was acting like platform and having a blanket approach on all sides, it was fine. Decent common laws of conduct. When Twitter started having a bias in one direction, it started to act like a publisher. Being a publisher and favoring one way or the other comes with responsibility. This is the big problem. You can't ask for no culpability for what is said on your site, and then selectivity choose to silence and monitor specific groups of people.

**EDIT - spelling mistakes

You are throwing water an on good hair on fire event. Stop it.

 

[Oldreefer44]

This is just another pander to the base. The courts have already ruled that a private company can sensor (or fact check) whatever it wants so this is another presidential edict that has no real impact other than to please 40% of the electorate.

 

[ross0201]

Doesn't need to be dumbed down. Who's truth. You apply to all or none was my reply. Should or should not isn't applicable as state and federal government do not regulate nor mandate such platforms or business.

As I said - I stay out of the political side of things but focussing on a much broader problem with social and media bias. It hurts across the spectrum regardless of what our opinions are.

Why wouldn't it be Twitter's truth? They own the platform. Just like this forum. You don't have to agree with it; you don't own it. There's no freedom of speech on private property.

 

[kyleinpdx]

When Twitter was acting like platform and having a blanket approach on all sides, it was fine. Decent common laws of conduct. When Twitter started having a bias in one direction, it started to act like a publisher. Being a publisher and favoring one way or the other comes with responsibility. This is the big problem. You can't ask for no culpability for what is said on your site, and then selectivity choose to silence and monitor specific groups of people.

**EDIT - spelling mistakes

Except section 230 of the Communications Decency Act allows for exactly this. Twitter is still not producing/amending/editing/etc the content, it is simply applying its own "commentary" or "opinions" to the content. If anyone would like to read the case law behind section 230, here you go!

 

[User1]

Why wouldn't it be Twitter's truth? They own the platform. Just like this forum. You don't have to agree with it; you don't own it. There's no freedom of speech on private property.

As long as it is applied equally to 500,000 tweets a day, sure. Be it a past or present or future president or Kardashian.

Edit: added words.

 

[Thales]

No. It wont. For obvious reasons if you understood the issue.

Buy carry on and set your hair on fire and do what you usually do.

Yes it will. For obvious reasons if you understood the issue. But carry on and melt like a snowflake like you usually do.

 

[kyleinpdx]

As long as it is applied equally to 500,000 tweets a day, sure. Be it a past or present or future president or Kardashian.

Edit: added words.

Twitter as a private organization has no requirement to be “fair” as long as they are not excluding based on a protected class.

 

[Silver14SS]

As long as it is applied equally to 500,000 tweets a day, sure. Be it a past or present or future president or Kardashian.

Edit: added words.

Why must Twitter apply it equally? Why should Twitter not have the freedom to apply their policies or censorship as they see fit?

Oooh, Rev is here :)

 

[JasonK84]

As long as it is applied equally to 500,000 tweets a day, sure. Be it a past or present or future president or Kardashian.

Edit: added words.

If he doesn’t like how Twitter’s moderators operate then he doesn’t have to have an account. He is free to startup his own social forum. He’s got the money! Doesn’t he?;Bored

 

[revhtree Verified Admin]

As much as I would LOVE not to have to address this I can't turn a blind eye and allow the discussion to continue. It's just a vehicle for hard feelings on a fish forum and we've already got enough hate and hard feelings in the world. This needs to be a place of peace even when we debate and disagree. Except our debate and disagreements should be over aquariums and not over political issues. Again I don't want to have to do it but for now this discussion has to be ended.