Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sam (crazy candle person) ✦
@samantha
I’ve been reading “The age of surveillance capitalism” and the author posits that once social networks start censoring users, they become responsible for the moderation of the platform Today tech CEOs testified at Congress and it seems that majority of the senators want *higher* moderation on these platforms
3 replies
2 recasts
33 reactions
Sam (crazy candle person) ✦
@samantha
My q to the philosophy channel is how do you build an uncensored social platform at scale when there is harm such as CP, sextortion, scams, bots etc. In this context harm is subjective. I don’t mean harm = illegal. CP is illegal, sending 1000 $DEGEN and getting 10k back is a scam but not illegal. They are both bad.
12 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
kia
@kia.eth
censor at the client all you want. just let the protocol be permissionless, both in writing and reading (many clients). e.g. email: google can kick me off gmail but no one can kick me off of SMTP (this is actually a bad example because spam prevention wars centralized email too)
2 replies
0 recast
6 reactions
Sam (crazy candle person) ✦
@samantha
Okay I don’t know the details (and I am not technical) but is SMTP hosted on their own servers/cloud? Otherwise they are also at their mercy of censorship via Google cloud, AWS, cloudflare etc.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mike | Abundance
@abundance
I second that. Censor/filter at the client level. Let people choose what they want content they want to consume. If course if it's something illegal then the client can be liable for allowing that thru, but otherwise empower people with more choices
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
