Re:Sixty Minutes Episode Is Pure Misleading Moral Panic Abou...
by giantg2 on Monday January 04, 2021 @06:58PM
(#25640011)
What would a sensible alternative be?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Sixty Minutes Episode Is Pure Misleading Moral Panic Abou...
by postmeta on Monday January 04, 2021 @07:05PM
(#25640096)
No recommendations or notifications without liability.
Re:Sixty Minutes Episode Is Pure Misleading Moral Panic Abou...
by giantg2 on Monday January 04, 2021 @09:24PM
(#25641280)
I don't think think this really solves the issue of content quality like the original comment was addressing.
However, I do think it's a step in the right direction and makes sense. After all, if your platform is promoting specific content by your own actions/volition, then it's no longer just content posted by some user, but it's now being used or reposted/linked by the company that owns the platform for monetary gain (I would guess ToS would solidify this with some boilerplate statement saying they can use your content to make money and to promote the platform etc).
Re:Sixty Minutes Episode Is Pure Misleading Moral Panic Abou...
by okennedy on Monday January 04, 2021 @07:05PM
(#25640102)
Decouple discovery (e.g., suggesting posts from new users or paid ads) from the protections afforded to dumb carriers/hosting services (i.e., posts received from users you follow or are engaged in a discussion with).
Re:Sixty Minutes Episode Is Pure Misleading Moral Panic Abou...
by giantg2 on Monday January 04, 2021 @09:29PM
(#25641319)
Are you basically saying to remove protections from platforms that take an active role in the content propagation, Like Facebook ranking algorithms? If so, I agree that this would be a step in the right direction. But what paradigm replaces the original comment's statement that platforms treat all content as good instead of vetting it for quality? I'm skeptical of how we could have a system that vets for quality without introducing more/other issues. That's what I wanted to learn more about.