Re:Big Tech deplatforming should be disturbing for everyone,...
by ssivark on Thursday February 11, 2021 @08:59PM
(#26109986)
A simple and more robust strategy is to force players to open up communication protocols, allowing end-users a variety of (federated) clients to communicate through. Users no more held hostage, that will encourage healthy market mechanisms in policy/curation decisions be it “disinformation” or whatever heuristic. And it would be great to have services with a variety of different policies so people can choose what they like and where to self-associate.
That way there’s no need for detailed and heavy-handed regulation, only an enforcement of a common protocol.
I think that's the heart of the matter. I've thought about this quite a bit, but when we say break them down, how does that work ?
Could there be legal thresholds such as what already exists with regards to ( actual ) hate speech and encouraging violence, based on publicly agreed upon standards ?
Platforms being legally accountable for enforcing arbitrary or biased deplatforming or shadowbanning ? They are a special kind of service ...
I guess you'd need a watchdog with teeth. Does anyone have a link to something that covers all this in depth ? Could well be a HN thread ( maybe this one .. )