posted by like_that
I feel like you either don't know what a slippery slope is or you're purposely playing dumb. When you have reps/senators proposing these type of committees, that means gets closer and closer to Government deciding which speech they want to regulate. Yes, I know it was AOC, thus why I said (and you purposely ignored) "Hopefully it's only a handful of the full retard sector...."
Do you really want a government committee decided which free speech should be censored vs uncensored? Even if it is with all the people you have your full trust in? If you say yes, please spare me gblock's "not all speech is protected/yelling in a theater" bullshit too. I know you're smarter than that.
Oh, I know what a slippery slope is, you are just full of hot air on the threat. As far as I know the committee is just an idea and is not a serious thing yet. Using AOC an as example is like me using one of the crazy QA people on the Republican's side as an example. You lose credibility.
And no I do not want a government committee deciding which free speech will be censured v. uncensored, but we are no where near that. Again, you are just crying about a threat that is not there. As usual, you are just making the worst case and screaming about slopes when there are none.
Back to topic at hand, and actually bringing a potential solution (which you know nothing about as usual), I read an interesting Foreign Affairs article yesterday where they suggest the solution may be middleware.
"Middleware products can be offered through a variety of approaches. One particularly effective approach would be for users to access the middleware via a technology platform such as Apple or Twitter. Consider news articles on users’ news feeds or popular tweets by political figures. In the background of Apple or Twitter, a middleware service could add labels such as “misleading,” “unverified,” and “lacks context.” When users logged on to Apple and Twitter, they would see these labels on the news articles and tweets. A more interventionist middleware could also influence the rankings for certain feeds, such as Amazon product lists, Facebook advertisements, Google search results, or YouTube video recommendations. For example, consumers could select middleware providers that adjusted their Amazon search results to prioritize products made domestically, eco-friendly products, or lower-priced goods. Middleware could even prevent a user from viewing certain content or block specific information sources or manufacturers altogether.
Each middleware provider would be required to be transparent in its offerings and technical features, so that users could make an informed choice. Providers of middleware would include both companies pursuing improvements to feeds and nonprofits seeking to advance civic values. A journalism school might offer middleware that favored superior reporting and suppressed unverified stories, or a county school board might offer middleware that prioritized local issues. By mediating the relationship between users and the platforms, middleware could cater to individual consumers’ preferences while providing significant resistance to dominant players’ unilateral actions.
Many details would have to be worked out. The first question is how much curation power to transfer to the new companies. At one extreme, middleware providers could completely transform the information presented by the underlying platform to the user, with the platform serving as little more than a neutral pipe. Under this model, middleware alone would determine the substance and priority of Amazon or Google searches, with those platforms merely offering access to their servers. At the other extreme, the platform could continue to curate and rank the content entirely with its own algorithms, and the middleware would serve only as a supplemental filter. Under this model, for example, a Facebook or Twitter interface would remain largely unchanged. Middleware would just fact-check or label content without assigning importance to content or providing more fine-tuned recommendations.
It has its pluses and minuses, but it an interesting idea.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-11-24/fukuyama-how-save-democracy-technology
