I don't want to fix twitter or FB

I want them to die

and they are on the verge of being in danger of losing their natural monopoly

I've closed my FB and twitter accounts

Except they won't die. We'll just have parallel systems and people will continue to caricature their opposition.

over the last year, a dozen competitors to FB twitter and youtube have tried to compete with the big tech corps

that's fine with me

being unified just means you have the illusion of not being in a parallel system

basically it is parallel _already_ except one side has no infrastructure at all

(but I do think they will die eventually, because by having 2 systems, they no longer have a natural monopoly of social networks)

The caricatures aren't reality though. The echo chambers amplify themselves and we are seeing the front side of the consequences as we speak.

that's fine

I mean we are headed to that anyway

it is an orthogonal problem

being together won't solve it

(one side would just get censored out whenver the two sides cross paths)

I disagree. That affords itself no meaningful counter-argument, I reckon.

here is the two things to weigh:

OTOH

A. you are basically donating money to the DNC by being on such a platform, and basically giving free ad time to the DNC


OTOH

B. you are together with the other side and mitigate some of the false caricaturing

I choose not to donate and give free ad space

it isn't worth whatever social gain there is by staying unified

Do you think I'm a CCP operative? Some people literally think that. (I'm not) That's what tribalism does.

:squinty eyes:

Lol

look, let me reframe this

I don't really care for a bifurcation of a censored left and a censored right

ideally the bifurcation for social media would be a censored left, and an uncensored apartisan (basically something equivalent to a "public square" minus pornography)

however, I doubt that the left would find it socially acceptable to visit the "nazi servers" to talk

so it would essentially be bifurcated anyway

1. I see the censorship by big tech as the fault of one side of the partisan divide,

2. I [now] see the big tech corps as political organizations,

3. I refuse to participate in contributing politically to them, tribalism or not. If this results in tribalism, that is Not My Problem; it is the fault of the big tech corps, and modernity (social media, the internet, large scale human networking capabilities, etc. naturally results in tribalism)

4. I don't think being on a single platform reduces tribalism; already on twitter there are people who never speak to the "other side" except in angry 200 character spats that does nothing to help the caricatures.

*pops in to check what's happening on new favourite chat site*

Check out Viva Frei amd Robert Barnes discussing applying the first ammendment to social media monopolies vs other forms of section 230 reform

Considering recent judgement by Thomas

I don't want 230 reform for censorship

I do want 230 reform for the blanket immunity that Barnes talks about

but not for censorship

@realz Like I said, In have no counter-argument but intuitively disagree. I use none of those platforms. I got Discord specifically for this channel.

I don't think 230 is even needed to protect websites, it is unconstitutional IMO to hold websites liable for their user-contributed content

And with that, I take my leave.

Benjamin Franklin didn't analyze every ad that was in his newspaper to see if might be defamation

@Zuluzeit later

and 230 reform, if done dumbly, can destroy the internet