Post Ar2PyedtWOVQpegam0 by KimSJ@mastodon.social
 (DIR) More posts by KimSJ@mastodon.social
 (DIR) Post #Ar1QilHywoQ1boSipM by interfluidity@zirk.us
       2025-02-11T21:58:14Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       from @Chronotope https://aramzs.xyz/thoughts/roost-must-prove-itself-good-thats-a-reasonable-request/
       
 (DIR) Post #Ar1SKbflFXQgk5C7HM by KimSJ@mastodon.social
       2025-02-11T22:16:13Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @interfluidity @Chronotope Isn’t that addressing the wrong problem? The fundamental issue is regarding these social media platforms as sources of profit, rather than as a service to the community. So ‘driving traffic’ is acceptable, and algorithms to do that are OK.     In reality, if a platform pushes content  from people you have not followed into your timeline, it is not Social Media, it is a publisher,  and should be treated as such, with all the obligations that that carries with it.
       
 (DIR) Post #Ar1SX5zMMR0IF0JhHk by interfluidity@zirk.us
       2025-02-11T22:18:32Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @KimSJ @Chronotope i'm not sure he's disagreeing? isn't he suggesting that maybe a world of small, human-moderated fora would be better than presuming large, algorithmic fora are the norm? (he doesn't address a profit/non-profit distinction, but it seems to me he's challenging the status quo.)
       
 (DIR) Post #Ar1n3VLhbaL5FEUy9I by KimSJ@mastodon.social
       2025-02-12T02:08:28Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @interfluidity @Chronotope Fair point, but the reality is that we have the big SM platforms, and we need to find a way to mitigate the damage they are causing. Wishing they weren’t there is a wonderful theory, but difficult in practice.
       
 (DIR) Post #Ar1ocOVf7qYo7eMF9c by interfluidity@zirk.us
       2025-02-12T02:25:58Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @KimSJ @Chronotope (getting rid of them is my basic theory for why we should revise section 230) https://www.interfluidity.com/v2/8093.html
       
 (DIR) Post #Ar2PyedtWOVQpegam0 by KimSJ@mastodon.social
       2025-02-12T09:24:36Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @interfluidity @Chronotope Interesting. Comment #9 (Tom Wittmann) shares my position… if a carrier’s algorithm shares posts that should be treated as ‘publishing’, and lose section 230 protection (or its equivalent in other jurisdictions).     That ‘small’ change would solve many problems with social media, and dramatically curtail its ability to foment angst for profit.