News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for... by jerf on Monday March 11, 2019 @10:55PM (#19364951)
It's not about what they claim to be, it's about the legal provisions that may or may not protect them. I'm not sure of all the details, which wouldn't fit in an HN post anyhow, but the short version is that if they are picking and choosing what can appear on their platform, they're also liable for it. Facebook, among other companies, want to both be able to pick and choose what appears on their platform and to enjoy the legal protections that come from not picking and choosing, but the days of that arrangement working for them are clearly numbered. And in the case of Facebook, they're clearly going to go for choosing what can appear on their platform, so it's only a matter of time before they get sued about it.
Re:Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for... by schoen on Monday March 11, 2019 @11:13PM (#19365073)
> I'm not sure of all the details, which wouldn't fit in an HN post anyhow, but the short version is that if they are picking and choosing what can appear on their platform, they're also liable for it.

You might be thinking of the pre-CDA rule suggested by the Stratton Oakmont case. But Congress specifically removed that rule!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratton_Oakmont,_Inc._v._Prod....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communicati...

Re:Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for... by Y_Y on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @04:13AM (#19366233)
Your link to

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stratton_Oakmont,_Inc._v._Prodigy_Services_Co.
seems to not format properly, because presumably hn strips the last '.' thinking it's a full stop to end a sentence. Boo.

Also for those wondering where they know the name from, that is indeed Jordan "Wolf of Wall Street" Belfort's company.

Re:Facebook backtracks after removing Warren ads calling for... by schoen on Tuesday March 12, 2019 @12:47PM (#19370178)