Section 230 is in trouble -- at last !

[wexter]

Banks, cloudflare
There is extrajudicial pressure for private companies to slam down activities of enemies of the state (a term which can mean anything someone wants to). Meanwhile there is none of the same pressure being exerted on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has nothing on De-banking but they mention cancel culture
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancel_culture

https://www.zerohedge.com/personal-fina ... over-risks


In the letters, which are dated August 25 and copies of which were provided to Rolling Stone, Wells Fargo offers zero explanation for the decision to terminate the relationship with these customers. The letter says that the bank “performs ongoing reviews of its account relationships in connection with the Bank’s responsibilities to manage risks in its banking operations,” and that the recipient’s accounts will be closed “as a result of this review.” Wells Fargo did not immediately respond to a request for comment. -Rolling Stone

[ericbarbour]

It be a lovely Friday morning--
and Masnick is whining and moaning again

https://www.techdirt.com/2022/09/16/bid ... hes-wrong/

They are both right and wrong. Situation is too complex and fluid to be handled with Sec 230 or sometime similarly primitive. My fellow Americans love pat answers. But they also love paranoid conspiracy talk. The idiot suckers. Insert shrug here.

[wexter]

A very incomprehensible Jimmy Wales interview.

To no effect;

The "interview has been condensed and edited for style and clarity." NOT!

https://reason.com/2022/09/18/what-wiki ... -internet/

The only thing I gleamed was that Jimmy Wales does not want folks looking in the direction of Section 230

Section 230 isn't where you need to look.

[ericbarbour]

https://reason.com/2022/09/18/what-wiki ... -internet/
The only thing I gleamed was that Jimmy Wales does not want folks looking in the direction of Section 230

He would say that. Predictable. So is this shit about "feudal models". Wales will deny it loudly, but the Wikipedia he helped to set up is one of the most feudalistic websites in existence--but unlike ordinary corporate social media, it's just very well hidden. They have a decentralized bunch of liars running it like feudal lairds. No "emperor" to "advise" or support or fight, just a gang of boyars constantly squabbling over stupid bullshit.

[SkepticalHistorian]

Wales the supercilious hypocrite and bigot regarding free speech, unpopular opinions, feudalism, censorship etc.

Raquel nailed him on his talk page and got blocked for it:

Comment: First they came for the Nazis... How about Zionists next? Did God really give them that land or the United Nations, are Palestinians in concentration camps? Is criticism of Israel antisemetic. Where do these WP:THOUGHTCRIME end? If “racists” and Nazis don’t use reliable sources or follow policy, they get banned. Why are there Laws against Holocaust denial, what are they afraid of? Why don’t we block Trump supporters? We should be skeptical and open minded not WP:BIGOT! Raquel Baranow (talk) 14:08, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Read the holier than thou virtue-signaling outrage here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk ... his_please

Repealing section 230 would be the ultimate way to censor truth on the internet, especially if there are laws or taboos against discussing certain topics that the feudal webhost or Wikipedians dislike.

A good example is what happened to KiwiFarms: a transgender illegal drug pusher (they have a website that sells illegally made hormones to children) organized a mob to get the Farms kicked off the internet. No webhost has the spine to stand up to the mob. DemoCrazy in action.

[badmachine]

Repealing section 230 would be the ultimate way to censor truth on the internet, especially if there are laws or taboos against discussing certain topics that the feudal webhost or Wikipedians dislike.

the truth is already censored on the important things. Sec 230 is useless or worse.

A good example is what happened to KiwiFarms: a transgender illegal drug pusher (they have a website that sells illegally made hormones to children) organized a mob to get the Farms kicked off the internet. No webhost has the spine to stand up to the mob. DemoCrazy in action.

F

[ericbarbour]

Another charming story about the "wonderful good" S230 does for us.

https://www.reuters.com/legal/tiktok-im ... 022-10-26/

[ericbarbour]

Interesting flex, though it could be argued that Sec 230 is NOT an inevitable aspect of the First Amendment.

Also, everyone crying about “free speech” conveniently ignores that the biggest threat to free speech in America is the fucking government, which seems completely bored of the First Amendment. They’re out here banning books, Elon! President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have identical policy positions on Section 230: they both want to repeal it. Do you know why? Because the First Amendment prohibits them from making explicit speech regulations, so they keep threatening to repeal the law that allows social networks to even exist in order to exert indirect pressure on content policy. It’s not subtle!

https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/28/234 ... moderation

You can't welcome Elon to hell: he helped make the internet hellish, long ago, by cofounding PayPal. A "bank-not-bank" to which banking regulations, intended to protect average people, do not apply. Thank you, Lord Elon The Questionable!

[SkepticalHistorian]

Looks like no Free Speech on Twitter: European Union threatens Elon Musk with the Digital Services Act, which prohibits “hate speech and misinformation.”

Elon Musk now owns Twitter but the EU is watching carefully lest the self-styled "free speech absolutist" turn the social media site into a platform for hate speech.

After Musk tweeted "the bird is freed," Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton responded with a wave emoji and "In Europe, the bird will fly by our rules." …

Breton's tweet was accompanied by the hashtag DSA, a reference to Digital Services Act — which requires providers of digital services to take swift action against illegal online content, such as hate speech.

The commissioner also tweeted a video showing him and Elon Musk in May after discussing the Digital Services Act.

In the clip, Breton tells Musk "I was happy to ... explain to you the DSA, a new regulation in Europe " and Musk replies: "I agree with everything you said."

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-comm ... our-rules/

So Twitter will continue to block Holocaust denial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_ ... ust_denial

[wexter]

You can't welcome Elon to hell: he helped make the internet hellish, long ago, by cofounding PayPal. A "bank-not-bank" to which banking regulations, intended to protect average people, do not apply. Thank you, Lord Elon The Questionable!

$27 Billion of Tesla Stock = he is using it as an "vastly overvalued currency" (so he is taking advantage of OPM "Other People Money)
Then he is loading up the company with $13 Billion in "CCC Junk debt" in a quasi-LBO Mike MIlken style!

but what exactly is he buying?
$3.8 Billion (a figure based on normalizing Tesla PE to an automaker) could probably build more than one social network, folks would come just because of the Musk noise machine. Again, what exactly is he buying?

It just seems like noise making to me and that seems to be the whole point.


Since when is a person more important than the product?