To the pedes here saying "Refine 230, don't remove it":
You are acting exactly like RINOs like Dan Crenshaw etc. "Don't pull out the troops".
You have to understand if you go for "Refine 230" approach, it will NEVER happen. You will wait for years and it will never happen.
It is the same thing as:
"Don't remove Obamacare, fix it"
"Don't pull out of NAFTA, fix it."
"Don't pull out of Iran deal, fix it."
"Don't pull out of Paris Climate accord, fix it."
Pulling the plug forces them to act or into the negotiating table. Sure, Big Tech can gain an advantage, but I think that is exagerrated. Lawsuits will go after big companies with money, not small tech companies.
Yes, I am sure Twitter/Facebook would certainly not fund lawsuits against their competitors second they can (which means second after their plants spam the competition with child porn)
i am no means a legal expert, but I think you guys are greatly exagerating a doomsday over removal of section 230.
Obviously, child porn is illegal and would be taken down by the website owner, even without section 230. How do you think other countries function? Seriously, some people here think there is no world outside the US.
Removing section 230 will have an impact, one of which is there will be increased overall censorship as websites will be forced to take down content to avoid getting sued, but I think Trump is betting that it will be a bigger headache for Big Tech rather than small companies.
Using AI and machine learning is a thing done even now, how do you think all the "election results have been called for Biden" notices get added on Twitter, or how is YouTube automatically recognizing copyrighted stuff?
It is all matter of training it and scaling it up, so they can do close to 100% of moderation automatically and in real time.
Small sites do not have that option, as running such extensive machine learning network is very resource demanding, even if you somehow manage to obtain a fully trained system that is ready to go (and you can bet the monopoly of Big Tech will gladly share theirs among themselves)
And frankly, even though I am not living in US, I do want US to keep being the tech dominant, because it is the only place where free speech and in more wider sense, freedom, is guaranteed (other countries are very much "well, yes, but actually no" about that)
The problem is Silicon Valley has enough money and a shared ideology that they can whether a storm like this.
However the other problem is that Ajit Pai and Congress are made up of cowards who refuse to enforce the law as it is written, which would give us the effect Trump needs.
Let me put it this way, once 230 is repealed then thedonald dot win will disappear the moment some /pol/ack starts ranting about kykes controlling America.
Obviously more money and resources, will always be an advantage for Big Tech, even just the number of legal team they can hire.
It all comes down to whether the projected pain is bigger for Big Tech or not. This is the same as China trade war all over again. Trump, for whatever data or advise he has got, is betting Big Tech will cave first coz they have more to lose.
That's all it is.
I don't think TDW will just vanish. Sure, they will go after it, but I'd think there be ways to temporarily work around it.
Maybe, making TDW non-public, for members only, will shield it,
or hosting it in another country.
Hey, if my pirated mangas and movie websites keep on resurrecting even after repeatedly being taken down again and again, I think TDW can survive.
100% agree. They are all brainwashed by that faggot Tim Pool. Every time he brings up Trump wanting 230 gone he goes fucking nuts. He goes on a tirade about how it is going to kill any small content creators. Fuck them, i would rather have my country survive then have some fuckwits make money on youtube, and they still would be capable of making money.
Like you said, other countries get along fine without it.
yep. Obviously, removing section 230 is not ideal.
But the threat and abuse of power happening right now from Big Tech outright censoring POTUS, controlling which is fact-checked news, etc, is so much bigger problem than killing small content creators/websites.
And small content creators and websites will not just die instantly, theyll find a way to survive even for medium term. It is not like Trump is saying there should be no immunity 230 permanently.
Perfect is the enemy of the good. There will be no perfect 230 solution in the near term, not without full control of Senate/ House and Presidency.
Same thing when Trump confronted China on trade deals, there are drawbacks. And RINOs whined about this is not the right approach blah blah. No pain, no gain.
The law just needs to be fixed. It was made to offer protection from bad actors on any forum.. chills come on here and many other good forums and post calls to violence or CP etc... TD would be held liable and shutdown by the current fbi without 230 just due to this. FB and Twitter would be called before Congress and talked to again.. they could eliminate all competing online forums that don’t agree with their current agenda..
230 needs to include - due to their “public” nature websites/companies can not violate people’s constitutional rights. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and free speech should all be protected.
This social contract in public spaces/domains has already been ruled as inherent in the constitution.. it just hasn’t been discussed in courts when it relates to online public spaces as far as I know.
Trump has rightfully assessed that the way "bureaucracy" works is that, nothing gets done unless you force the issue. You have to blow it up and people with "bigger" to lose will act and cooperate. He has done this so many times already.
Of course, it also means, he has to back the talk. In case they don't negotiate, it should be more hurtful for Big Tech than smaller companies.
Do other countries have section 230 immunity legislation? Do they suddenly have a collapsed internet websites? I don't think so. Granted, most of the biggest websites in the world are American.
I don't think it (removing section 230) is as bad as people think. Trump would have already calculated this. Not saying there is no impact, but I think the strategy is sound.
IMO revoking 230 would absolutely have a bad effect, but it would take time to appear. Nothing would happen until someone actually started suing a site over content on it, and then the courts would have to decide how to handle it now that 230 was gone. Hopefully somewhere around that point, a new/better version of 230 would be passed.
Trump is a risk-taker, he's probably willing to accept that trade-off in order to get reform.
To the pedes here saying "Refine 230, don't remove it":
You are acting exactly like RINOs like Dan Crenshaw etc. "Don't pull out the troops".
You have to understand if you go for "Refine 230" approach, it will NEVER happen. You will wait for years and it will never happen.
It is the same thing as:
"Don't remove Obamacare, fix it"
"Don't pull out of NAFTA, fix it."
"Don't pull out of Iran deal, fix it."
"Don't pull out of Paris Climate accord, fix it."
Pulling the plug forces them to act or into the negotiating table. Sure, Big Tech can gain an advantage, but I think that is exagerrated. Lawsuits will go after big companies with money, not small tech companies.
Yes, I am sure Twitter/Facebook would certainly not fund lawsuits against their competitors second they can (which means second after their plants spam the competition with child porn)
i am no means a legal expert, but I think you guys are greatly exagerating a doomsday over removal of section 230.
Obviously, child porn is illegal and would be taken down by the website owner, even without section 230. How do you think other countries function? Seriously, some people here think there is no world outside the US.
Removing section 230 will have an impact, one of which is there will be increased overall censorship as websites will be forced to take down content to avoid getting sued, but I think Trump is betting that it will be a bigger headache for Big Tech rather than small companies.
Big tech does not care.
Using AI and machine learning is a thing done even now, how do you think all the "election results have been called for Biden" notices get added on Twitter, or how is YouTube automatically recognizing copyrighted stuff?
It is all matter of training it and scaling it up, so they can do close to 100% of moderation automatically and in real time.
Small sites do not have that option, as running such extensive machine learning network is very resource demanding, even if you somehow manage to obtain a fully trained system that is ready to go (and you can bet the monopoly of Big Tech will gladly share theirs among themselves)
And frankly, even though I am not living in US, I do want US to keep being the tech dominant, because it is the only place where free speech and in more wider sense, freedom, is guaranteed (other countries are very much "well, yes, but actually no" about that)
The problem is Silicon Valley has enough money and a shared ideology that they can whether a storm like this.
However the other problem is that Ajit Pai and Congress are made up of cowards who refuse to enforce the law as it is written, which would give us the effect Trump needs.
Let me put it this way, once 230 is repealed then thedonald dot win will disappear the moment some /pol/ack starts ranting about kykes controlling America.
Obviously more money and resources, will always be an advantage for Big Tech, even just the number of legal team they can hire.
It all comes down to whether the projected pain is bigger for Big Tech or not. This is the same as China trade war all over again. Trump, for whatever data or advise he has got, is betting Big Tech will cave first coz they have more to lose. That's all it is.
I don't think TDW will just vanish. Sure, they will go after it, but I'd think there be ways to temporarily work around it. Maybe, making TDW non-public, for members only, will shield it, or hosting it in another country.
Hey, if my pirated mangas and movie websites keep on resurrecting even after repeatedly being taken down again and again, I think TDW can survive.
100% agree. They are all brainwashed by that faggot Tim Pool. Every time he brings up Trump wanting 230 gone he goes fucking nuts. He goes on a tirade about how it is going to kill any small content creators. Fuck them, i would rather have my country survive then have some fuckwits make money on youtube, and they still would be capable of making money.
Like you said, other countries get along fine without it.
yep. Obviously, removing section 230 is not ideal.
But the threat and abuse of power happening right now from Big Tech outright censoring POTUS, controlling which is fact-checked news, etc, is so much bigger problem than killing small content creators/websites.
And small content creators and websites will not just die instantly, theyll find a way to survive even for medium term. It is not like Trump is saying there should be no immunity 230 permanently.
Perfect is the enemy of the good. There will be no perfect 230 solution in the near term, not without full control of Senate/ House and Presidency.
Same thing when Trump confronted China on trade deals, there are drawbacks. And RINOs whined about this is not the right approach blah blah. No pain, no gain.
The law just needs to be fixed. It was made to offer protection from bad actors on any forum.. chills come on here and many other good forums and post calls to violence or CP etc... TD would be held liable and shutdown by the current fbi without 230 just due to this. FB and Twitter would be called before Congress and talked to again.. they could eliminate all competing online forums that don’t agree with their current agenda..
230 needs to include - due to their “public” nature websites/companies can not violate people’s constitutional rights. Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and free speech should all be protected. This social contract in public spaces/domains has already been ruled as inherent in the constitution.. it just hasn’t been discussed in courts when it relates to online public spaces as far as I know.
yeah sure. but how do you force it to happen?
Trump has rightfully assessed that the way "bureaucracy" works is that, nothing gets done unless you force the issue. You have to blow it up and people with "bigger" to lose will act and cooperate. He has done this so many times already.
Of course, it also means, he has to back the talk. In case they don't negotiate, it should be more hurtful for Big Tech than smaller companies.
Do other countries have section 230 immunity legislation? Do they suddenly have a collapsed internet websites? I don't think so. Granted, most of the biggest websites in the world are American.
I don't think it (removing section 230) is as bad as people think. Trump would have already calculated this. Not saying there is no impact, but I think the strategy is sound.
IMO revoking 230 would absolutely have a bad effect, but it would take time to appear. Nothing would happen until someone actually started suing a site over content on it, and then the courts would have to decide how to handle it now that 230 was gone. Hopefully somewhere around that point, a new/better version of 230 would be passed.
Trump is a risk-taker, he's probably willing to accept that trade-off in order to get reform.
Trump also has a lot of suits personally lined up, he's been against 230 because of the way people on social media are allowed to defame him.