Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We need more than deplatforming

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 83 posts

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#31

Post by meekrohprocess »

O_H_E wrote: post #18

> Additional precise and specific actions must also be taken: > Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted. > Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact. > Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual* voices over disinformation. > Work with independent researchers t…

Transparency in how ads are targeted would go a long way.

Personally, I would appreciate a legal mandate that every targeted advertisement must include a link explaining which demographics or criteria are being used to target the ad.

Ideally the ad would also need to identify which criteria were applicable to the individual who was shown the ad, and where that information came from. That requirement might be onerous to implement, but maybe it could kick in at a certain revenue threshold for the ad network.

Imagine if people had to be told that they kept seeing embarrassing ads because their bank sold their interest in [product category] to a marketing agency. Or if you could inform your aging relatives that they shouldn't trust ads which target them based on their past multilevel marketing purchases. I can dream...

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#32

Post by gotoeleven »

solipsism wrote: post #13
danielvaughn wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being quite glib if you're honestly pretending not to see the glaring subtext there. The intention is obviously to increase transparency in order to stamp out unwanted opinions before they even spread .

Yes. Unwanted opinions like "we should overthrow the will of the people using force".

Yes I agree unwanted opinions are the worst only wanted opinions should be allowed.

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#33

Post by aidenn0 »

This is probably an unpopular opinion on this forum, but it seems like repealing section 230 would accomplish this just fine. Then large platforms would either have to:

1. Completely relinquish any editorial controls (which means advertising money goes bye-bye).

2. Completely sanitize things.

Smaller platforms are at lower scale and can manually moderate (as they often do currently thanks to trolling and spam)

Sounds like a win-win to me!

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#35

Post by war1025 »

drewbug01 wrote: post #30
war1025 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> completely done with the bullshit I'm over and done with Trump, but it would have been a lot more effective for everyone if they had let him skulk meekly off into irrelevance.

Pretty sure that wasn’t his plan, given the months-long campaign to overturn the election: which culminated in him inciting a riot.

Trump definitely had a chance to remain relevant post-election. As someone that monitors "alt-right" type people, he did a very poor job capitalizing on any of that. The past couple months have basically been the losing team talking up a big game to make themselves feel better.

The riots have been going all year. It was a different crowd this time, but riots are old news at this point. It wasn't a good look for the MAGA crowd and more than anything probably would have cowed them into submission.

But then Big Tech had to turn around and give everyone a reason to be pissed off again.

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#36

Post by uoaei »

war1025 wrote: post #35
drewbug01 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure that wasn’t his plan, given the months-long campaign to overturn the election: which culminated in him inciting a riot.

Trump definitely had a chance to remain relevant post-election. As someone that monitors "alt-right" type people, he did a very poor job capitalizing on any of that. The past couple months have basically been the losing team talking up a big game to make themselves feel better. The riots have been going all year. It was a different crowd this time, but riots are old news at this point. It wasn't a good look for the M…

At this point, it merely sounds like you've started with the conclusion that Big Tech is bad and then worked backwards to sound reasonable.

In particular since the "riots have been going all year" is demonstrably false nonsense. Parades and rallies, maybe. Riots? What?

And how are you even going to equivocate riots to an invasion of the physical center of the US government by whiny "patriots" who had no other plan except to waltz in and wait for the next cutscene to start?

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#38

Post by Noos »

O_H_E wrote: post #18

> Additional precise and specific actions must also be taken: > Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted. > Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact. > Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual* voices over disinformation. > Work with independent researchers t…

The link worries me the most.

I mean, apparently the solution is social networks running a private list of "authoritative" news sources and making sure the feed is weighted towards them. The three listed have a clear left-wing bias. The alternative was Breitbart, and some other network I haven't heard of, but was probably included to try and balance it out.

So it's really not "transparency" since there's no objective news ecosystem quotient out there to be audited, its just the reverse of what was used to promote fake news, now its just promoting what they think real news it.

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#39

Post by war1025 »

uoaei wrote: post #36
war1025 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump definitely had a chance to remain relevant post-election. As someone that monitors "alt-right" type people, he did a very poor job capitalizing on any of that. The past couple months have basically been the losing team talking up a big game to make themselves feel better. The riots have been going all year. It was a different crowd this time, but riots are old news at this point. It wasn't a good look for the M…

At this point, it merely sounds like you've started with the conclusion that Big Tech is bad and then worked backwards to sound reasonable. In particular since the "riots have been going all year" is demonstrably false nonsense. Parades and rallies, maybe. Riots? What? And how are you even going to equivocate riots to an invasion of the physical center of the US government by whiny "patriots" who had no other plan ex…

> In particular since the "riots have been going all year" is demonstrably false nonsense.

Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, Kenosha, DC, etc. etc. etc.

> And how are you even going to equivocate riots to an invasion of the physical center of the US government

It's just a building.

Re: We need more than deplatforming

#40

Post by Lammy »

solarmist wrote: post #26
Lammy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation." Who gets to decide which is which? Why would I want to tell people they are wrong about how they experience the world when they disagree with the way I do?

A fact is a thing that can be objectively verified. It is a fact regardless of a person’s experience. The word you’re thinking of is opinion. Which is how someone interprets a fact or a set of facts.

Facts are just opinions we share with enough other people. Consensus reality is the only reality imo
Post reply on HN