Live data from Hacker News

The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

cyberlaw.stanford.edu

141–150 of 520 posts

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#141

While this bill is strongly opposed by the Internet Society, ACLU, CDT, and EFF, the critiques I've read don't get much into the real "why" behind this legislation continuing to be pushed so forcefully. The pretext is, of course, "protect the children" and more generally law-and-order with a bonus side-helping of "stop those awful social media giants." While these justifications are (hopefully) obvious misdirection t…

Edit: See thread below, the EARN IT act does not in any way reclassify the designation of social media companies under section 230 or solve the issues mentioned in this post with 230. The change to 230 just provides exceptions for CSAM. However, keep reading if you want background on 230 and why many people are trying to change it.

I want to provide some background on section 230 which the EARN IT act proposes to amend. I was against regulating social media companies, then I researched and wrote a paper on misinformation and changed my opinion on whether or not any policy action should be taken. I'm not saying the EARN IT act is correct (Edit: It's not), but here are some excerpts with sources on why I believe Section 230 should be amended in some way. I hope it makes more clear the reasons people want to change section 230.

Social media companies currently enjoy protections from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. For reference, Myspace was launched in 2003. Section 230 allows social media companies to be classified as interactive computer services and not information content providers (Gallo, 2021). Due to this designation, social media companies are not responsible for the content they distribute. Even media companies in America are still held responsible for libel or false information designed to incite immediate violence or public harm (FCC, 2021) which social media companies are not. The media is still provided many freedoms guaranteed by our constitution while being held responsible for gross negligence.

Social media companies do not adequately moderate the content they promote to their users, allowing members of society to be presented misinformation by domestic and foreign actors resulting in polarization, the propagation of false facts, and the loss of faith in our democratic electoral process. Social media algorithms, motivated by financial gains, promote divisive content and have little incentive to prevent the distribution of false information. This false, divisive information comes from internal actors, such as those who want to discredit climate change and COVID facts. It also comes from external actors, such as Russia, who want to destabilize our democratic systems and influence our policy choices in their best interest.

For example, YouTube shared videos containing COVID-19 misinformation 20 million times, generating 71 million reactions in eight months (Gallo, 2021). Russia's Internet Research Agency (IRA) is a private organization funded by a close confidant of Putin (Bowen, 2021). Eighty thousand posts were made on Facebook by IRA-controlled accounts in two years, reaching 126 million users. The IRA even organized political rallies in the United States through these accounts (Mueller, 2019). Intelligence services have determined that Russia uses its cyber teams to "undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process," as Russia's influence operations demonstrated in the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton (Sayler, 2021).

I'm not saying that social media companies should be held to the same standard as content creators or the media, or that the EARN IT act is right. I haven't looked at the implications of that. However, the current law is outdated and something needs to change the incentives of social media companies to prevent these externalities (influencing elections, misinformation, etc) from effecting our population.

FCC. (2021, January 8). Broadcasting False Information. Federal Communications Commission. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/broadcasting-false-info...

Gallo, J. A. G., & Cho, C. Y. C. (2021, January). Social Media: Misinformation and Content Moderation Issues for Congress (No. R46662). Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46662

Mueller, R. S. M. (2019, March). Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, Volume I of II. U.S. Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download

Sayler, K. M. S., & Harris, L. A. H. (2021, June). Deep Fakes and National Security (No. IF11333). Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11333

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#142

All it is going to take is one big violent event organized using end-to-end encryption and that's it, this bill (or something like it) will pass. So you should probably prepare for that political battle if this is an issue you care about

What violent conspiracy hasn't incorporated encryption? Can you read in plaintext every email that cross the Web? I can't even access HN over HTTP. Encryption is the default for modern communication. That's the rub: it's a mass surveillance bill masquerading as an encryption bill.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#143
post #50
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These people seem incapable of understanding the existential threat to free society and democracy posed by limiting everyone's ability to communicate private thoughts. The existential threat this bill poses to free society and democracy is exactly why they're supporting it. It's not some accidental side effect. They're opposed to the existence of free society and democracy because it limits government power, which…

We had a free society and democracy before the internet.

Some of us did. America has never been a free and Democratic society for all, and we’re actually closer to achieving that than ever if you’re not white/straight/upper-middle class, which is why they’re so desperate to push this bill through.

The government had de-facto control of all mass media before the internet. They could control the narrative to a degree they didn’t need tight surveillance. They lost control of that with the internet and are desperate to get it back.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#144
post #24

The 3 Techdirt links in the article are especially helpful for catching up. EARN IT is another skirmish in the 30+ year old Crypto Wars. For those who care about defending privacy and encryption, exhaustion is not an option. Power-hungry governments must be viewed similarly to an APT in this context. They are following their very nature, and they will never stop inventing new approaches. There is no other option exce…

While I agree with you, I think the last 5 years have shown that exhaustion wins. It is just a matter of time. People won't stay vigilant. They just want to provide a life for their family. Life is hard enough without having to stop clueless and bribed politicians from ending freedom on a weekly basis.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All section 230 does is make it so that "platforms" can remove posts it doesn't like without needing to assume liability for every other posts. Unless they think Twitter is going to hire a few million employees to screen every post, Twitter and the rest would simply turn off the platform to anyone who isn't verified or doesn't otherwise sign a waiver releasing twitter of that liability (which was possible before CDA,…

Section 230 is from 1996. For reference myspace launched in 2003. It has been modified since, but not in a way relative to this discussion. Section 230 classifies providers such as Facebook and Twitter as "interactive computer services" and not "information content providers." This protects them from lawsuits based on the content they provide. I'm not arguing that Facebook should be held to the same standard as the p…

If they curate and editorialize they are partly content providers. Where to draw the line is not clear.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#146
What we need is positive privacy rights that are very well thought out and firm in preventing legislation such as this from even ever surfacing, as what's proposed in this policy should just be illegal in the first place. These privacy rights would go against what both Silicon Valley and NSA/CIA/Pentagon want, so we need a movement to fight it. I don't think i believe anyone with any power (including Silicon Valley big wigs) are actually opposed to any of this garbage.

Anyway, I'm sick of just being reactive to this anti-human garbage. People need to get clued in and slay the demons instead of building stuff for them.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#147
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, no, not with the media deciding what everybody heard. We had as much of a free society as convenience combined with the interests of every individual running TV news allowed. It was a complex system and I wouldn't want to describe it all here, but the fact that you and I can talk to each other in front of anyone who wants to listen in, is far ahead of anything that existed then.

>Not really, no, What? You're really arguing that, to put a year on it, in 1990 we didn't have a free society and democracy?

In 1990 school kids were pledging our fucking allegiance to an evil empire. Hell no we didn’t have a free society then.

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#148
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We had a free society and democracy before the internet.

We had a society in which all media was controlled by a handful of corporations who dictated what people saw and thought. That is not by any means a free society. Then along came Bulletin Board Systems and then the Internet, and all that changed. Legislation like the EARN IT Act is meant to turn back the clock to silence the voice of the people so that, once again, only the voice of the bourgeoisie can be heard.

  Then along came Bulletin Board Systems and then the Internet, and all that changed.
No BBS ever changed diddly squat. Even the internet had minimal impact on politics until the 2000's. The entire comment just sounds like speculation about a time that is, in fact, fairly recent history.

  We had a society in which all media was controlled by a handful of corporations who dictated what people saw and thought.
That only makes sense if you ignore all sorts of pivotal historical events (eg: uprisings and revolutions).

Not that I disagree that populist internet media are really contributing to the betterment of mankind /s

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#149
I know it's wildly off-topic but can someone please explain to me why there are still sites like this that are clearly well funded and professional that fail to have spent - what - 2-3 designer hours time ($150?!) on a simple mobile stylesheet?

They almost definitely get 50%+ mobile traffic. What gives?

Re: The EARN IT act is back, and it’s more dangerous than ever

#150

No matter your opinion on the issue, the firearm lobby would probably serve as an effective model for fighting legislation like this on a long term basis.

It would require people willing to be single-issue voters, the way many are on abortion or firearms. Would anyone here switch party votes to a candidate who sided their way on tech privacy — even if they disagreed on other core principles like abortion, gun rights, religion in schools, etc? Maybe a few, but I'm not convinced many.

Those single issue voters are the not present in many other countries besides the US.

This might show that the right arguments and lobbying can turn what is not a big political debate into a wedge over time.

Post reply on HN