Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by Goety on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @02:45PM
(#27764440)
The problem is no 'public square' can be defended adequately, particularly if everyone can access it.
Misrepresentation of the publics interest and voice will continue to occur. There is no solution that I'm aware of.
Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by Karsteski on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @02:48PM
(#27764481)
When you say misrepresentation of public interest, what do you mean by that?
Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by Goety on Thursday July 08, 2021 @06:22PM
(#27778336)
I mean when news/politician/ect cherry picks specific and narrow online environments (usually astroturfed) to target or represent a larger group.
Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by smoldesu on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @02:44PM
(#27764432)
> I would prefer if such a "public square" site weren't for profit, if I'm going to be honest. Not sure how well that would work
Works perfectly fine. There are plenty of alt-platforms that are based on self-hosted principles like that (Mastodon, Pleroma, Matrix), and all of them are about the most "free" platforms (rather, protocols) you can find.
Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by Karsteski on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @02:49PM
(#27764494)
Yea, I do think protocols, not platforms, is the way to go. I especially like the way Mastodon works because you can allow/disallow federation of servers without actually being able to deplatform others
Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by kstrauser on Wednesday July 07, 2021 @03:52PM
(#27765096)
As a Mastodon admin, I wholeheartedly agree. I can decide not to connect to a given server, but I can't stop that server from existing. I think this is an excellent design.
Re:Trump sues Twitter, Google and Facebook alleging 'censors...
by Splognosticus on Thursday July 08, 2021 @02:20AM
(#27768927)
You're just describing Usenet, which still exists, and is still easily accessible, and has been around for decades on end. Honestly any action to crack down on social media for enforcing their terms of use for their own platform is a solution looking for a problem.
This would be ideal. The network effect is strong. As Barrin92's response to my comment stated, anyone can make an alternative site. But all of the value comes from the large networks of people on these sites.
I would prefer if such a "public square" site weren't for profit, if I'm going to be honest. Not sure how well that would work, but profit motives introduce too many flaws for such a necessary part of society. OTOH, so do influences from other means...