HN Reader

Sen. WHITEHOUSE: We are moving to file a bipartisan Section 230 repeal

I have a question. Section 230 basically says companies are allowed to moderate without being defined as publishers and losing liability protection.

Could X just basically stop moderating all together? The one (many?) conflicts here is that they legally have to moderate some things (CSAM) and there would be conflict in terms of moderating adult content. Basically is the law consistent enough to adopt a hands off strategy to maintain liability protection? Or would you be forced to go the other direction.

12 hours agoby techblueberry

Is anyone taking bets on how long it'll take for a certain group of high netwoth individuals to sue Wikipedia out of existence for not censoring publicly available information?

On the bright side: future generations will know a cozy, curated version of reality. They won't have to hear distasteful and unsettling things abut our leaders in government and industry. We'll finally be safe from those billionaire sex pests and fraudsters, because we'll have no clue they exist.

9 hours agoby m4ck_

This would be an interesting combo with Moody v. Netchoice.

6 hours agoby cosmicgadget

Just a few lawsuits after section 230 repeal will cause vastly more moderation and the disappearance of many or most comment sections. This isn't going to lead to a free speech valhalla.

I think I'm implicitly assuming that laws are equally applied, which is increasingly untrue.

11 hours agoby bediger4000

I hope they do!

9 hours agoby 2OEH8eoCRo0

https://www.threads.com/@senamyklobuchar/post/DSK4Uf6kezY/

"It has been nearly 30 years since Congress passed Section 230 and gave platforms immunity from lawsuits.

Our children deserve a safer internet and tech companies need to be held accountable for what happens on their platforms."

12 hours agoby tguvot