This would be a decent opportunity for Harris to create some distinction between her and Biden. While his administration had to endure the fallout from Afghanistan, hers could acknowledge the challenges and work harder towards solutions.
This would likely garner support from veterans and active duty military, who understand the importance of allies, and tend to believe deeply in the principle of “no one left behind”.
Trump Media’s relationship with the executive, a software developer in North Macedonia, began in part because American candidates for the same work were more expensive, according to a person involved.
Now where have I seen Macedonia and Trump mentioned before?
I wonder why elese they were looking toward Macedonia to give someone a favor? Couldn’t possiby be that they are scratching someone’s back, could it? I’m just asking questions.
And they’re firefighters. They lean conservative. Not as much as cops, but they still lean conservative. Yeah, it was a union, but so is the police union.
Section 230 was invented for things like mailing lists, newsgroups, phpBB-style forums, wikis. IMHO all of those are great things that we should definitely continue to have.
Notice something? None of these have recommendation algorithms. If someone posts something to any of these kinds of platforms, it will be shown deterministically to those who have chosen to look at or subscribe to the place where it is posted; but it will not be shown to anyone else.
I think it makes sense, regardless of how the current law should be interpreted, to say that operators of these kinds of platforms aren’t liable for what users do with them, but once you install a recommendation algorithm to show things to more users who haven’t actively made the choice to look for/at those things, you are liable for the choices of that recommendation algorithm.
I admit that there are gray areas in that distinction, particularly whether search results should count as recommendation algorithms; but that is the general idea of what the law should ideally be.
Current large social media platforms get so much data uploaded to them all the time that their recommendation algorithms basically constitute a choice on the part of the social media platform to promote some of that data over other data. This makes these kinds of social media platforms essentially media companies, and everyone agrees that media companies are liable for what they promote.
normally they don’t, perhaps there are such plugins available, but the normal way of using them is to have those threads on top that have most recently been posted in, and that concept should definitely be protected by section 230 and equivalents
Trending posts is not a recommendation algorithm, in my opinion. I think the slope stops at curation (interests-based algorithms targeted at specific users).
I.e. reddit homepage is now curated, Lemmy sorting methods are not.
Then if they go this route, they better make sure that they clearly define what they mean by a “Recommendation Algorithm” or an “interests-based algorithm” because the opinions of individuals won’t hold up in court.
If it’s not defined an attorney could easily argue that Lemmy’s “Scaled” algorithm is a “recommendation algorithm” and you would hope that the judge understood enough about programming to know where to draw the line.
I think the laws need to clarify the difference between just hosting vs suggesting content. Tik Tok should be responsible since it suggested the dangerous video, unlike if it was just hosted on an AWS server.
If Biden/Harris were responsible, I would hope they wouldn’t pick a kid who got kicked off the high school shooting team for being a comically and dangerously bad shot.
This is an obvious abuse of power, and is clearly illegal, or at least it is in EU, but since this is about USA, it’s probably alright, because USA is no longer a country of law. If it was, Trump would not still be walking around a free man, running for president.
I hope EU will never decline to the depths Trump and republicans have dragged USA.
First as other people said, it doesn’t work like that. Second there’s already a process in the EU Comission against X because of them knowingly spreading misinformation.
It’s about accreditation in the US. It’s the same reason Fox News and Newsmax are classified as “entertainment.” Social media companies are not required to provide accurate information. They’re only held accountable by civil suits for slander or libel.
In a review of more than 300 cases between 2021 and 2023, the inspector general flagged 42 cases for the FBI that required “immediate attention” because there was no evidence of recent investigative steps taken or because of other concerns, according to the report.
news
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.