Election Spergery 2024 Containment Zone

[Ｍｕｒｒａｙしないで]

Poll has closed. Congratulations spics, you have been granted the rank of White.

ARRIBA

 

[Paladin]

I'm interested in the actual implementation as his original claim was to kill 230 altogether. However now that he has Musk by his side, I wonder how that will change, which is probably for the better as a death to 230 outright would fuck with the farms some more.

Here is his campaign promise on it

 

[Negzana]

Here is his campaign promise on it

How would this affect the Farms? Since it's privately owned by one guy (right?) and it uses ostracism/pink triangles instead of banning someone usually (Banning is only for absolute pests) wouldn't that count as neutral?

 

[RestlessRain]

How would this affect the Farms? Since it's privately owned by one guy (right?) and it uses ostracism/pink triangles instead of banning someone usually (Banning is only for absolute pests) wouldn't that count as neutral?

Without seeing the specific laws, hard to say (and the bill will have to go through Congress, so will be subject to change). However, the requirement for neutrality is, allegedly, only for "large platforms", which I don't think Kiwifarms would meet.

 

[Hotdogs Aplenty]

How would this affect the Farms? Since it's privately owned by one guy (right?) and it uses ostracism/pink triangles instead of banning someone usually (Banning is only for absolute pests) wouldn't that count as neutral?

So this is AI right? Trump staying on topic this long with big words is unprecedented.

 

[Ｍｕｒｒａｙしないで]

How would this affect the Farms? Since it's privately owned by one guy (right?) and it uses ostracism/pink triangles instead of banning someone usually (Banning is only for absolute pests) wouldn't that count as neutral?

One aspect of Section 230 is that platforms can moderate the content posted to them as they so choose, and it's this part that free speech advocates may have a problem with (though one could argue that these platforms deciding what content they want to host and not host is in itself free speech on behalf of the platform). But another part of it is legal protections for platforms for content which is posted to them by a third party. So, for example, if I post content on TVA slandering Nijisanji and they get butthurt about it, with Section 230 in place, they can sue me (if they can find out how), but they can't sue Proctor. If 230 is ripped out wholesale without some sort of replacement for that second part of it, platforms like TVA or KF or Twitter suddenly become vulnerable for lawsuits for the content that its members post to it. Twitter and Elon might be able to shoulder that cost, but Proctor almost certainly couldn't and I doubt KF Josh could either - so the internet might end up even more centralized around massive companies like Twitter/Greater Elon, Facebook/Meta, and Google/Alphabet. Let's hope that doesn't happen.

 

[thhrang]

I saw this on Xitter and it made me think of Clara's spergery.

 

[RestlessRain]

Rie is occasionally a bit off with her rhythm but she can be a funny bitch sometimes.

If only Rie was this funny on stream.

 

[TheHindrance]

Yeah, it's crazy what they try to get away with. The most important legislation for streaming is going to be the impact of his 230 reforms. He said a while ago he was going after big tech and forcing them to be neutral on issues. This will likely have a large impact on Vtubing as well as streaming in general if he chooses to proceed with these reforms.

Honestly rather than focusing on big tech's propaganda machine, I would rather he focus on big tech bastards selling our data, at least let us make money from it damn.

 

[Butterworth]

So, for those interested, the supposed Clara alt (instagram) hasn't stopped posting abortion shit that's completely false or misleading.
Lefty ignorance and/or stupidity, I'm done.
To see it without signing up, you can use storynavigation.com

 

[RestlessRain]

Yeah, it's crazy what they try to get away with. The most important legislation for streaming is going to be the impact of his 230 reforms. He said a while ago he was going after big tech and forcing them to be neutral on issues. This will likely have a large impact on Vtubing as well as streaming in general if he chooses to proceed with these reforms.

I don't know if 230 reforms will have a "big impact" on vtubing. Edgy indies like, say, Kirsche, might be able to push the envelope with their content and opinions, but the big corpo players will stick to the same non-political, sponsor-friendly content that they currently do.

 

[PleaseCheckYourReceipts]

I don't know if 230 reforms will have a "big impact" on vtubing. Edgy indies like, say, Kirsche, might be able to push the envelope with their content and opinions, but the big corpo players will stick to the same non-political, sponsor-friendly content that they currently do.

Section 230 reform shouldn't have an impact on vtubers.

As for that topic in general, the baseline issue is that the law just doesn't work and it's created a situation where they use other countries to try and suppress the speech of people around the globe. The Publisher/Platform dynamic just isn't working in the modern environment. For the non-Americans, it's important to understand that a "public space" has basically full Speech Protections under the US Constitution. The Social Media platforms are clearly used as Public Spaces by the Public, so there is basically a massive fight over how they manage the space. (In a real-world reality, you can't normally go protesting after a certain time at night and that's considered perfectly legal.)

Real-time information manipulation is clearly also part of the entire social media ecosystem, which is why Musk bought Twitter. He gained real power in a world where it's extremely expensive. (And got screwed by other power players in Delware courts. But that's a different topic.)

 

[Hff201]

Losing Section 230 protections would fuck everyone over, since in an attempt to protect themselves from lawsuits the big platforms would all roll out even more automated suppression tools to hide anything that could be even remotely controversial. If they're legally liable for potential defamation cases they'll shoot first and ask questions later with any kind of posts/videos/streams etc. that criticise another person/corperation in the same way they do with copyright, which will obviously catch a lot of people in the crossfire.

 

[Security]

The Publisher/Platform dynamic just isn't working in the modern environment. For the non-Americans, it's important to understand that a "public space" has basically full Speech Protections under the US Constitution. The Social Media platforms are clearly used as Public Spaces by the Public, so there is basically a massive fight over how they manage the space. (In a real-world reality, you can't normally go protesting after a certain time at night and that's considered perfectly legal.)

"used as" is not the same as "is". However, this is further muddled by government involvement into businesses, making them quasi-government. Argument could (in my opinion, easily) be made that public companies are, well, public, and would fall under restrictions of the First Amendment. Interestingly, Twitter is now Private, so they wouldn't be subject.

This is a still not all 230 is about, with the Publisher/Platform aspect, but I think would make for interesting court cases on their own.

Losing Section 230 protections would fuck everyone over, since in an attempt to protect themselves from lawsuits the big platforms would all roll out even more automated suppression tools to hide anything that could be even remotely controversial. If they're legally liable for potential defamation cases they'll shoot first and ask questions later with any kind of posts/videos/streams etc. that criticise another person/corperation in the same way they do with copyright, which will obviously catch a lot of people in the crossfire.

230 going down entirely would be devastating, but also really, really, really funny.

I don't think the automation tools would work, either in practice or in being upheld as being "enough" in the court of law. I think what would happen is every large-scale site - Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Twitch, etc. - would simply be unfeasible, and thus cease to exist. Everything would have to be treated as a Publisher, like a Newspaper or TV Channel - invite-only, curated, approved. Social Media would just... die.

Lots of ramifications to that, and I can easily see the good in it, along with the bad. Regardless, would be very interesting.

 

[Takodachi]

my condolences to the 3 Clara fans of the forum who decided to drop her for a pretty mid-high tier woman moment

View attachment 82651

Anyone expecting a woman under 30 to not be a lefty is kind of a retard tbh. Always assume your oshi is a tränny supporting/fucking retard until proven otherwise.
Only exceptions would be Latino vtubers living in LATAM, and even then I'd tread with caution.

 

[NeneHATE]

"used as" is not the same as "is". However, this is further muddled by government involvement into businesses, making them quasi-government. Argument could (in my opinion, easily) be made that public companies are, well, public, and would fall under restrictions of the First Amendment. Interestingly, Twitter is now Private, so they wouldn't be subject.

This is a still not all 230 is about, with the Publisher/Platform aspect, but I think would make for interesting court cases on their own.



230 going down entirely would be devastating, but also really, really, really funny.

I don't think the automation tools would work, either in practice or in being upheld as being "enough" in the court of law. I think what would happen is every large-scale site - Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Twitch, etc. - would simply be unfeasible, and thus cease to exist. Everything would have to be treated as a Publisher, like a Newspaper or TV Channel - invite-only, curated, approved. Social Media would just... die.

Lots of ramifications to that, and I can easily see the good in it, along with the bad. Regardless, would be very interesting.

I would honestly love to see an arms race between the geriatrics in the government and all of the techbros making workarounds and finding loopholes to build a second age of the wild west internet. At this point I see more benefits to this than negatives, social media is a scourge on society. Imagine all of the normalfriends being unable to get their dopamine shots of overproduced trash on tiktok or being unable to screech out their mindless opinions on twitter? It would be like a great reset for all of the bullshit.

 

[Brosnan Pierce Brosnan]

Anyone expecting a woman under 30 to not be a lefty is kind of a retard tbh. Always assume your oshi is a tränny supporting/fucking retard until proven otherwise.
Only exceptions would be Latino vtubers living in LATAM, and even then I'd tread with caution.

I mean she is over 30

 

[God's Strongest Mozumite]

You guys are now doing that whole "creating better humans" thing and I do not like that end game

There's no need to create "better humans", black people already exist!

PISS
View attachment 82780​

"Hey, Icey Snowpaws, quit stealing my moves!"

 

[Ｍｕｒｒａｙしないで]

At this point I see more benefits to this than negatives, social media is a scourge on society. Imagine all of the normalfriends being unable to get their dopamine shots of overproduced trash on tiktok or being unable to screech out their mindless opinions on twitter? It would be like a great reset for all of the bullshit.

Define "social media." Is Reddit "social media?" Is this forum "social media?" If you said yes to one and no to the other, how can you explain the difference without just using the site names?

If you don't want to see Proctor become legally liable if some random idiot comes here and starts fedposting, you don't want to see 230 repealed without some sort of replacement to protect platform owners in a similar way.

 

[NeneHATE]

Define "social media." Is Reddit "social media?" Is this forum "social media?" If you said yes to one and no to the other, how can you explain the difference without just using the site names?

If you don't want to see Proctor become legally liable if some random idiot comes here and starts fedposting, you don't want to see 230 repealed without some sort of replacement to protect platform owners in a similar way.

Maybe we all start fedposting until the feds can't find who is actually serious about it lol. They can't fuck with people from other countries anyway, the US doesn't own the internet. Anyways I'm not being ultra serious about any of this, just having fun imagining twitter and reddit dying, damn that would improve mankind a whole lot.