Exactly. The massive companies can afford the highly sophisticated AI that would be required to carefully scan all posts in real time. Additionally, it will encourage them to increase the stringency, and insta-block anything that even seems like it could have controversial content.
The largest corps also will also be able to afford any lawsuits that arise if some content sneaks through the censors. Small platforms never will.
Sites like this would have to either keep their "platform" status, but stop blocking content based on things like being an anti-Trump shill, which would quickly turn the site into another place for reddit content, or become a "publisher" and be required to censor everything- which would really mean ceasing to exist.
Some people argue that it'd work if it only applied to sites that are a certain size, but again, take into account a site like this. We are certainly not a small site, and just keep growing - but will never have the resources that cutouts like FB have.
Eliminating 230 sounds good in theory, but in practice, it would give big tech co's the perfect opportunity to get rid of all their up & coming competition, AND increase censorship and control of content.
I'm pretty sure that if 230 is repealed, the "platform" status won't exist any more. I think it would then be up to the courts what to do if someone wanted to sue over content posted here (or anywhere).
Big Ask or not, there needs to be a plan on what the new 230 would be after it's revised.
This part of the truth of the matter worries me the most.
Eliminating 230 sounds good in theory, but in practice, it would give big tech co's the perfect opportunity to get rid of all their up & coming competition, AND increase censorship and control of content.
Exactly. The massive companies can afford the highly sophisticated AI that would be required to carefully scan all posts in real time. Additionally, it will encourage them to increase the stringency, and insta-block anything that even seems like it could have controversial content.
The largest corps also will also be able to afford any lawsuits that arise if some content sneaks through the censors. Small platforms never will.
Sites like this would have to either keep their "platform" status, but stop blocking content based on things like being an anti-Trump shill, which would quickly turn the site into another place for reddit content, or become a "publisher" and be required to censor everything- which would really mean ceasing to exist.
Some people argue that it'd work if it only applied to sites that are a certain size, but again, take into account a site like this. We are certainly not a small site, and just keep growing - but will never have the resources that cutouts like FB have.
Eliminating 230 sounds good in theory, but in practice, it would give big tech co's the perfect opportunity to get rid of all their up & coming competition, AND increase censorship and control of content.
I'm pretty sure that if 230 is repealed, the "platform" status won't exist any more. I think it would then be up to the courts what to do if someone wanted to sue over content posted here (or anywhere).
You are exactly right.
Big Ask or not, there needs to be a plan on what the new 230 would be after it's revised.
This part of the truth of the matter worries me the most.