Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NPR)   "A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied." So "Revoke 230" should scare the hell out of everyone?   (npr.org) divider line
    More: Obvious, Social media, Bill Clinton, Law, Twitter, Communications Decency Act, tech companies, Social network service, Nancy Pelosi  
•       •       •

3612 clicks; posted to Politics » on 30 May 2020 at 8:05 PM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



74 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-05-30 6:36:34 PM  
It should if you like porn and cussing on the internet.
 
2020-05-30 7:05:57 PM  

koder: It should if you like porn and cussing on the internet.

 
2020-05-30 7:13:44 PM  
Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.
 
2020-05-30 7:18:30 PM  
This could spell the end of sideboob on Fark!
 
2020-05-30 7:38:51 PM  

NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.


Given how small it is Trump seems quite adept at shooting himself in the dick.
 
2020-05-30 7:38:58 PM  

NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.


Trump is a troll. No need to upend the internet because of trolls; that's exactly what they want--maximum disruption. Putin would certainly love it if we destroyed our one fallback industry, the internet, just because we couldn't learn to ignore and overpower a few of his trolls.
 
2020-05-30 7:41:18 PM  
Has anyone told Donnie how many platforms will have to drop his Tweets and even his Press Briefings?
 
2020-05-30 7:57:38 PM  
The threat of civil monetary punishment is far greater than any criminal prosecution that never happens.
 
2020-05-30 8:10:10 PM  
If we can eliminate the liberal social media sites we can just replace them with ones we run and like!

/S
//With government protection for "their" sites
///IOKIYAR
 
2020-05-30 8:10:16 PM  
SPLC probably already has the lawsuit to force Gab out of business printed up and ready for submission.
 
2020-05-30 8:11:28 PM  

NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.


As will any online forum including fark.  It won't be worth the risk to host any online interaction.  And I can guarantee you a few people from the MPAA and RIAA are getting off just thinking about the idea of removing section 230.  Currently the entertainment industry has to go after people for copyright infringement on a case by case business.  This will let them destroy any website where a random user so much as mentions the word piracy.

You guys cheering this on just don't get it, THERE WON'T BE ANY PLACE LEFT ONLINE TO POST ABOUT THIS because every single online forum that is subject to US laws are going to be shut down.
 
2020-05-30 8:13:43 PM  

Warlordtrooper: NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.

As will any online forum including fark.  It won't be worth the risk to host any online interaction.  And I can guarantee you a few people from the MPAA and RIAA are getting off just thinking about the idea of removing section 230.  Currently the entertainment industry has to go after people for copyright infringement on a case by case business.  This will let them destroy any website where a random user so much as mentions the word piracy.

You guys cheering this on just don't get it, THERE WON'T BE ANY PLACE LEFT ONLINE TO POST ABOUT THIS because every single online forum that is subject to US laws are going to be shut down.


Given what the Internet has done?

I'm now all for the complete repeal of section 230 and full liability for all content providers.
 
2020-05-30 8:15:22 PM  
I really love the internet but after the past few years, it might be worth it to never have to see a Trump tweet again.
 
2020-05-30 8:15:41 PM  
I hate that such a stupid mantra has become fact in so many people's eyes. "If everything be walks away pissed it's good. It's like business."

No. Nobody in business signs a deal they don't find positive. Business isn't a goddamned zero sum game. When a deal is reached in business everyone feels they are better off because of it, and walks away happy when it's done. If they thought it was bad they wouldn't sign.
 
2020-05-30 8:16:57 PM  
Time to build a new Internet.  A better one, with blackjack and hookers.
 
2020-05-30 8:19:49 PM  
Wait, so social media platforms will be responsible for what Trump posts? Therefore Trump cant post anymore?
 
2020-05-30 8:21:44 PM  

koder: NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.

Trump is a troll. No need to upend the internet because of trolls; that's exactly what they want--maximum disruption. Putin would certainly love it if we destroyed our one fallback industry, the internet, just because we couldn't learn to ignore and overpower a few of his trolls.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-05-30 8:22:53 PM  

koder: It should if you like porn and cussing on the internet.


If you're not willing to give that up* to destroy Trump's only real form of communication you need to reconsider your patriotism.


*and haven't already saved enough porn for 400 lifetimes
 
2020-05-30 8:28:42 PM  
"Revoke 230"
Sure go ahead.

ecdn.teacherspayteachers.comView Full Size
 
2020-05-30 8:32:13 PM  

Warlordtrooper: NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.

As will any online forum including fark.  It won't be worth the risk to host any online interaction.  And I can guarantee you a few people from the MPAA and RIAA are getting off just thinking about the idea of removing section 230.  Currently the entertainment industry has to go after people for copyright infringement on a case by case business.  This will let them destroy any website where a random user so much as mentions the word piracy.

You guys cheering this on just don't get it, THERE WON'T BE ANY PLACE LEFT ONLINE TO POST ABOUT THIS because every single online forum that is subject to US laws are going to be shut down.


You convinced me, now go tell Lord Trump to get his head out of his ass and stop being a thin-skinned little biatch afraid of twitter fact checks.  Better yet, agree not to vote for him because if he wins again, it will happen, one way or another.
 
2020-05-30 8:34:58 PM  
Honestly at this point I'd almost accept the death of all of the main internet and the inevitable return of something like old school BBS's as the only actual communication.  Just to see the comments section of every podunk shiathole newspaper shut down, and all the astro turfing bullshiat laid to rest.  Facebook would fight it, but I imagine Facebook and Twitter and such would go to verified accounts only with no comment threads allowed, making them basically just an advertising platform for celebrities and politicians.  So...no real change except the honesty.
 
2020-05-30 8:36:20 PM  
FARK will be farked.
Imagine Donnie gets 2nd term but is booted off Twitter. He would actually have to face the nation when he addresses the nation. Not quite the same as keyboard trolling. He would look like a fool and (SHOCK) he may not be able to avoid questions.
 
2020-05-30 8:39:14 PM  

LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly at this point I'd almost accept the death of all of the main internet and the inevitable return of something like old school BBS's as the only actual communication.  Just to see the comments section of every podunk shiathole newspaper shut down, and all the astro turfing bullshiat laid to rest.  Facebook would fight it, but I imagine Facebook and Twitter and such would go to verified accounts only with no comment threads allowed, making them basically just an advertising platform for celebrities and politicians.  So...no real change except the honesty.


The only difference between Facebook and the message boards of old is the slick interface. Revoking 230 will effectively eliminate all venues for user generated content and commentary. Anything uploaded by anyone will have to be vetted by a live person before being posted.
 
2020-05-30 8:40:00 PM  
Does it lessen Facebook's and Twitter's influence on civilization? if so, yes please.
 
2020-05-30 8:40:32 PM  
The movement to revoke those safeguards is increasingly becoming a bipartisan consensus, with presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden even saying Section 230 should be scrapped.

We really need to stop nominating and electing senior citizens who don't understand any technology invented after 1940 and how the series of tubes works.
 
2020-05-30 8:41:06 PM  
I'm willing to sacrifice making comments on Fark. I'll find a different outlet.
 
2020-05-30 8:41:42 PM  
Gas Pedal Gaetz said he was going to file a FEC complaint about Twitter for election interference. So either he doesn't know the FEC is broken (very possible) or he knows it and it not going to file but make it another useless announced action they never do.

I'll take the useless announcement for $200, Alex.
 
2020-05-30 8:44:45 PM  
Well, it would be a mess. It would most likely end all anonymous browsing of social media overnight.  You'll still have Fark or Twitter or Facebook but you'll be required to join and sign a contract to see anything.

If you thought ad tracking was bad now, the data mining from an all logged in community would be far worse.
 
2020-05-30 8:45:34 PM  
Won't all the websites just relocate to more friendly countries?
 
2020-05-30 8:46:23 PM  
They'd basically have to ban every republican because blood libel and threats are all they have.
 
2020-05-30 8:47:22 PM  

mcreadyblue: Won't all the websites just relocate to more friendly countries?


That's what I'm wondering. Wouldn't just not doing any business in the US be a workaround?
 
2020-05-30 8:49:36 PM  

fusillade762: This could spell the end of sideboob on Fark!


Brother, I've got some bad news for you...
 
2020-05-30 8:53:06 PM  

Hand Banana: The movement to revoke those safeguards is increasingly becoming a bipartisan consensus, with presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden even saying Section 230 should be scrapped.

We really need to stop nominating and electing senior citizens who don't understand any technology invented after 1940 and how the series of tubes works.


For shame.
We would have to actually interact with other human beings the old fashioned way.
What are we wild beasts
 
2020-05-30 8:53:33 PM  
img.huffingtonpost.comView Full Size
 
2020-05-30 9:00:26 PM  
Drew would be begging for money a lot more than even now, thats for sure.
 
2020-05-30 9:04:16 PM  
Sadly this won't impact places like Facebook or Twitter at this point.  They can afford lawyers, and almost all of these cases are real easy to win in court based on first amendment grounds (speech, peaceful assembly).

What it will do is decimate everything else.

It's the penultimate cutting off your nose to spite your face.
 
2020-05-30 9:04:51 PM  

Invincible: LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly at this point I'd almost accept the death of all of the main internet and the inevitable return of something like old school BBS's as the only actual communication.  Just to see the comments section of every podunk shiathole newspaper shut down, and all the astro turfing bullshiat laid to rest.  Facebook would fight it, but I imagine Facebook and Twitter and such would go to verified accounts only with no comment threads allowed, making them basically just an advertising platform for celebrities and politicians.  So...no real change except the honesty.

The only difference between Facebook and the message boards of old is the slick interface. Revoking 230 will effectively eliminate all venues for user generated content and commentary. Anything uploaded by anyone will have to be vetted by a live person before being posted.


Scale and profitability.  No one is going to bother trying to chase down some BBS hosted on a rotating basis in Norway, but if they do revoke 230 I guarantee it'll be a matter of weeks before the US has it's own version of the Great Firewall of China this time set up in reverse by the big companies to continue to milk the US without facing liability.  Local newspaper website?  Sitting target with money on the line, but not much actual money in their pockets.  They'll shut it down just to avoid getting named in the civil suit next time some asshole shoots up a school after some other asshole posts comments about how all school shootings are false flags by crisis actors.
 
2020-05-30 9:09:30 PM  
This line of thinking so stupid it hurts. Bipartisanship for it's own sake is destructive and corrupting. It says it's more important to compromise the fate and future of the nation than to disagree or fight against things you know to be wrong. The recent bailout for businesses was wrong full-stop and it wasn't tailored to help small businesses as advertised. Giving in to that for the sake of compromise means that you value compromise over effectiveness, over people, over the future, over life. Sometimes ideas are just wrong or bad and shouldn't be considered. If you let wrong/bad ideas thrive legislatively or any other way, you are just as wrong and corrupting as those ideas.

"I'm not a racist, but we have a lot of racists in congress and they want to track when brown people use their IDs, so for the sake of compromise we let them, so that they didn't decrease taxes by 15%, only 12%."

That apparently intelligent people can discuss "compromise" and "bipartisanship" as if they are successful/thoughtful philosophies or solutions unto themselves hurts my soul. Bipartisanship is what you appeal to when you're too afraid to fight, you've run out of ideas, or you want to create a false argument against a good idea with few down sides.
 
2020-05-30 9:12:08 PM  

lilplatinum: Drew would be begging for money a lot more than even now, thats for sure.


Yeah, but Drew wanted this and only changed tracks on the Trump Train when it reached a point that if you rubbed their faces in it any harder they'd have road rash.  Drew, I will grant, isn't upset that Trump said the quiet part out loud.  He's upset that now that it's been said he has to actually look in the mirror and think about what that means.  I do not, however, believe he's finished doing so and reached the point of putting, "I don't want these results to keep happening" together with "then why was I voting for them in the first place?"  As demonstrated by the ill-fated attempts to show us all how much economic anxiety his "friends" had by greening daily RT links.
 
2020-05-30 9:17:35 PM  
You can worry.  But it would take an act of Congress.  And this Congress is NOT going to change that law.

And it won't make it that far, once someone finally explains to tRump that such rulings will hurt everyone, including him.  In fact, he will be one of the first affected.
 
2020-05-30 9:30:11 PM  

NeedlesslyCanadian: Silver lining: If social media companies are in fear of being sued for the content people put up on their platforms, Trump will be banned real quick.


Right-wingers, anti-vaxxers, Nazis, Antifa, BLM, LGBTQ, OMGWTFBBQ, and more. Anything remotely controversial, will become verboten on major platforms. Sites like Fark, SomethingAwful, Free Republic, Slashdot, Reddit, and many (many) more will become lawsuit magnets. That's before social media sites and search engines.
 
2020-05-30 9:31:22 PM  
Testing...
 
2020-05-30 9:43:49 PM  

LowbrowDeluxe: Invincible: LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly at this point I'd almost accept the death of all of the main internet and the inevitable return of something like old school BBS's as the only actual communication.  Just to see the comments section of every podunk shiathole newspaper shut down, and all the astro turfing bullshiat laid to rest.  Facebook would fight it, but I imagine Facebook and Twitter and such would go to verified accounts only with no comment threads allowed, making them basically just an advertising platform for celebrities and politicians.  So...no real change except the honesty.

The only difference between Facebook and the message boards of old is the slick interface. Revoking 230 will effectively eliminate all venues for user generated content and commentary. Anything uploaded by anyone will have to be vetted by a live person before being posted.

Scale and profitability.  No one is going to bother trying to chase down some BBS hosted on a rotating basis in Norway, but if they do revoke 230 I guarantee it'll be a matter of weeks before the US has it's own version of the Great Firewall of China this time set up in reverse by the big companies to continue to milk the US without facing liability.  Local newspaper website?  Sitting target with money on the line, but not much actual money in their pockets.  They'll shut it down just to avoid getting named in the civil suit next time some asshole shoots up a school after some other asshole posts comments about how all school shootings are false flags by crisis actors.


Anyone who wants to shut down or deplatform any kind of speech will be given the tools to do so. Yeah, maybe I'm being dramatic, but this law protects Usenet servers in the same way it protects Facebook.
 
2020-05-30 9:46:51 PM  
I'm a bit torn on this.

While innovation in the digital landscape is critical the idea that a company can offer a product and not own 100% of the consequences of people who use that product to harm others are selling an unsafe product.

The firearms, and to a large degree pharmaceutical industries, already share a privileged status  the harm their products cause can't be litigated.  That's sort of fair. But, do the bridges that trolls live under also fall under this umbrella of shiat products with absolute impunity?
 
2020-05-30 9:51:48 PM  
Maybe all social media websites should be dissolved. People will have to meet in secret & use bot-resistant methods. Whispering in secret, they could ... whisper in secret.

Obviously, they should disable news aggregation websites' comment secti++NO CARRIER
 
2020-05-30 9:55:02 PM  

Mouser: Time to build a new Internet.  A better one, with blackjack and hookers.


imagesvc.meredithcorp.ioView Full Size
 
2020-05-30 10:01:05 PM  
So after driving all the sites to other countries, is the plan then to block access to anything outside the US?

This is how you China.
 
2020-05-30 10:01:11 PM  
"A good compromise is when both parties are dissatisfied."

I used to actually believe this. Until Republicans jumped off a cliff and Democrats decided that half-way down while still in free fall is an appropriate location to compromise. Both parties are still going to hit the ground at terminal velocity.
 
2020-05-30 10:02:34 PM  

LowbrowDeluxe: Invincible: LowbrowDeluxe: Honestly at this point I'd almost accept the death of all of the main internet and the inevitable return of something like old school BBS's as the only actual communication.  Just to see the comments section of every podunk shiathole newspaper shut down, and all the astro turfing bullshiat laid to rest.  Facebook would fight it, but I imagine Facebook and Twitter and such would go to verified accounts only with no comment threads allowed, making them basically just an advertising platform for celebrities and politicians.  So...no real change except the honesty.

The only difference between Facebook and the message boards of old is the slick interface. Revoking 230 will effectively eliminate all venues for user generated content and commentary. Anything uploaded by anyone will have to be vetted by a live person before being posted.

Scale and profitability.  No one is going to bother trying to chase down some BBS hosted on a rotating basis in Norway, but if they do revoke 230 I guarantee it'll be a matter of weeks before the US has it's own version of the Great Firewall of China this time set up in reverse by the big companies to continue to milk the US without facing liability.  Local newspaper website?  Sitting target with money on the line, but not much actual money in their pockets.  They'll shut it down just to avoid getting named in the civil suit next time some asshole shoots up a school after some other asshole posts comments about how all school shootings are false flags by crisis actors.


You don't go after the site directly, you sue their host. The host has deep pockets.
 
2020-05-30 10:30:42 PM  

fusillade762: This could spell the end of sideboob on Fark!


RIP SIDEBOB

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
Displayed 50 of 74 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.