I said this on Reddit, but of course the comments got almost no views.
Aside from moving to federated platforms, our only move is to pit them against each other.
Disguise your dissent as a jab against a competing platform or founder.
The point is good (centralized censorship is a problem), but the headline is false. Big tech is pretty happy using you for rage-bait. Big tech is delighted to spread what is ridiculous, silly, funny, or otherwise engagement grabbing about you. For at least the next several years, big tech will be prone to spreading stories that hurt themselves or their causes. The sector isn’t that secure or monopolized, tic-tok hadn’t taken such a market share until like 2 years ago.
Isn’t the reason that online companies are not directly liable for the users’ contents that they are a kind of neutral publisher? When this “neutral” falls flat, aren’t they publishing their opinion, and would have to carry responsibility for that?
I think that once they start deciding what content to show you, whether via algorithm or human decision, they become an editor/publisher and should be liable for that content
We should‘ve never allowed the rich to take control of our biggest public spaces. Because social media is practically exactly that and censorship of any kind should not be allowed no matter who owns it.
