Section 230 is good overall I think it just shouldn’t apply to anything sorted by engagement or not clearly defined and auditable. Section 230 makes sense for Craigslist but not for Facebook/Twitter. If a site has a “suggested posts” section or “you may like” feature they should be treated as publishers and not protected.
Lemmy cant. It has a clear cut sorting strategy which is open source. Assuming we’re talking about actual suggestions which are based on something else than most upvotes, most downvotes, most upvotes per time.
No idea. In my opinion the law and computer code are very similar. Its the people working to make and interpret it who bring in variation, for good and bad.
Section 230 is good overall I think it just shouldn’t apply to anything sorted by engagement or not clearly defined and auditable. Section 230 makes sense for Craigslist but not for Facebook/Twitter. If a site has a “suggested posts” section or “you may like” feature they should be treated as publishers and not protected.
Lemmy can suggest top posts. Should it be protected?
Lemmy cant. It has a clear cut sorting strategy which is open source. Assuming we’re talking about actual suggestions which are based on something else than most upvotes, most downvotes, most upvotes per time.
Some types of sorting algorithms would trigger the law and some wouldn’t. This sounds like a nightmare to codify in law.
No idea. In my opinion the law and computer code are very similar. Its the people working to make and interpret it who bring in variation, for good and bad.