I'm surprised Devin Nunes didn't join this clown car, but he's probably busy filing more frivolous lawsuits against the Twitter account of his mom's cow.
I wouldn't put it past Zuck to suck up to Fox News viewers, but it's also possible Perino is mis-communicating exactly what he said. Can we get a link to the actual interview so we can check for ourselves?
I wouldn't take Biden's threats too seriously, at least not right now. It's primary season and whatever candidate takes the most extreme positions on divisive issues gets the most attention. If he does get the nomination he'll probably moderate his position to join the "reform Section 230" camp and support whatever "think of the children" legislation is down the pipeline. Perhaps that isn't ideal, but it'd be the same thing under the current status quo.
This is ironic because Biden actually voted for the CDA. However, he was probably more a fan because it originally tried to compel sites to remove their smut, a provision which was found unconstitutional by Reno v. ACLU. As with how he has gone after "violent video games", it should be no surprise that Biden isn't a fan of our Constitutional rights and the First Amendment.
Fighting sex trafficking is hard enough without U.S. tech companies helping foreign-based sex trafficking companies grow and profit from their trafficking in this country.
I try explaining this to some of my friends, and the response I got was that I was letting big companies 'off the hook'. So the question is where does human behavior stop and corporate responsibility start? Youtube is an interesting test case since we have legacy media outlets arguing more responsibility is not promoting potentially dangerous voices, while individual creators argue this means better treatment and more creative freedom. Both these things are desirable in theory, but they also can conflict.
It's hard to judge the bill without seeing the text, but my biggest concern is who determines what the "best practices" are (is it in the bill itself? will the FTC decide?). If you report someone as being a child predator, does that company have an incentive to investigate if that's true, or is the "best practice" just to block alleged pedos on sight for risk of getting sued?
His claim about "internet companies can now be held responsible for pedophiles" seems to be a near total misreading of last year's passing of FOSTA, which added an exception to Section 230 for sex trafficking (not for pedophilia).
I read in Politico that Lindsey Graham is preparing another Section 230 carve-out, this time for child predators (yeah, another one "for the kids"). The goal is, apparently, to use Section 230 as a carrot-on-a-stick to get app developers to adopt "best practices" when dealing with pedophiles and perverts.
Well, you can't expect companies to broaden their liability umbrella, as much as you can expect rich people to pay more taxes than they need to (if they pay any all).
Unless they're testifying under oath, they have no legal entitlement to be right, at least in the U.S. of A. This also applies everyone, with exceptions for defamation and lying to law enforcement.
Aside from stopping metering and throttling, you can stop the monitoring by encrypting the information that goes through these Big Dumb Pipes, which is already happening to some degree with the move to HTTPS and DOH.
I had to do a double take when I saw the headline. My first thought was that some high-tech food company was monitoring our eating habits and selling our bowel activities. The most food-related movements they're probably monitoring is what drive-thrus we're using and selling it to fast-food marketers.
Saying she's a "fascist dreamer" is probably overdoing it. She was probably just too emotional in the wake of a tragedy to think things through. Unfortunately our knee-jerk reaction to these kinds of events is usually to expand the surveillance state.
(untitled comment)
I'm surprised Devin Nunes didn't join this clown car, but he's probably busy filing more frivolous lawsuits against the Twitter account of his mom's cow.
(untitled comment)
Google's lawyers are probably already preparing to argue that the precedent set by these wrist slaps is an even weaker slap on the wrist :p
(untitled comment)
I wouldn't put it past Zuck to suck up to Fox News viewers, but it's also possible Perino is mis-communicating exactly what he said. Can we get a link to the actual interview so we can check for ourselves?
No surprise
Guess it's no surprise that France is so quick to surrender their rights and due process.
Typo in headline
It's "coronavirus", not "coronovirus".
Re:
I wouldn't take Biden's threats too seriously, at least not right now. It's primary season and whatever candidate takes the most extreme positions on divisive issues gets the most attention. If he does get the nomination he'll probably moderate his position to join the "reform Section 230" camp and support whatever "think of the children" legislation is down the pipeline. Perhaps that isn't ideal, but it'd be the same thing under the current status quo.
Ironic
This is ironic because Biden actually voted for the CDA. However, he was probably more a fan because it originally tried to compel sites to remove their smut, a provision which was found unconstitutional by Reno v. ACLU. As with how he has gone after "violent video games", it should be no surprise that Biden isn't a fan of our Constitutional rights and the First Amendment.
Complaint
Reads first sentence of the complaint:
Losing too many brain cells, have to stop.
Re: Re: If Thanksgiving Dinner has tought us anything...
I try explaining this to some of my friends, and the response I got was that I was letting big companies 'off the hook'. So the question is where does human behavior stop and corporate responsibility start? Youtube is an interesting test case since we have legacy media outlets arguing more responsibility is not promoting potentially dangerous voices, while individual creators argue this means better treatment and more creative freedom. Both these things are desirable in theory, but they also can conflict.
Re:
It's hard to judge the bill without seeing the text, but my biggest concern is who determines what the "best practices" are (is it in the bill itself? will the FTC decide?). If you report someone as being a child predator, does that company have an incentive to investigate if that's true, or is the "best practice" just to block alleged pedos on sight for risk of getting sued?
Pedos on the interwebs
I read in Politico that Lindsey Graham is preparing another Section 230 carve-out, this time for child predators (yeah, another one "for the kids"). The goal is, apparently, to use Section 230 as a carrot-on-a-stick to get app developers to adopt "best practices" when dealing with pedophiles and perverts.
broken clock
pretty sure there's a saying about a broken clock that applies here
Re: Re:
Well, you can't expect companies to broaden their liability umbrella, as much as you can expect rich people to pay more taxes than they need to (if they pay any all).
Props
Props to Wikimedia for actually showing some spine against repressive governments.
Re: Re: Re:
Unless they're testifying under oath, they have no legal entitlement to be right, at least in the U.S. of A. This also applies everyone, with exceptions for defamation and lying to law enforcement.
Re: The Pipes
Aside from stopping metering and throttling, you can stop the monitoring by encrypting the information that goes through these Big Dumb Pipes, which is already happening to some degree with the move to HTTPS and DOH.
Plate Data
I had to do a double take when I saw the headline. My first thought was that some high-tech food company was monitoring our eating habits and selling our bowel activities. The most food-related movements they're probably monitoring is what drive-thrus we're using and selling it to fast-food marketers.
Second time I've seen this mistake
The first time I've seen an article mistake the DMCA with CDA 230 was in The Register, with the ironically titled article "The completely rational take you need on Europe approving Article 13: An ill-defined copyright regime to tame US tech". I suspect there's lots of confusion about the two laws since they both "protect" internet platforms. It's unfortunate that supposedly reputable sources are spreading this misconception instead of dispelling it.
(untitled comment)
All hail the Infinite Scroll!
Re: Live and let Live
Saying she's a "fascist dreamer" is probably overdoing it. She was probably just too emotional in the wake of a tragedy to think things through. Unfortunately our knee-jerk reaction to these kinds of events is usually to expand the surveillance state.
More comments from Ben L >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Ben L.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt