Again, what is all this codswallop?
You don’t have a need or a right to load unfiltered live video to YouTube, and anyone who says you do is mad or trying to sell you something.
“… which we have decided to solve the problems of Big Tech by making them liable for what their users say and do, thus all our speech is vetted by algorithms that delete anything that looks like misinformation, harassment, copyright infringement, incitement to terrorism, etc – with the result that the only place where you can discuss anything of import is newspapers themselves.”
Uh, if big tech uses algorithms to do the vetting, it will be bad. If big tech uses humans to do the vetting, it will be better. And why again does the idea that Facebook has to be responsible always come down to ‘that way lies fascism?’ Why can’t Facebook just hire people to vet content?
I like newspapers because they’re written by people smarter than I am, with different interests; I buy the Sunday NYT to learn about the world above and beyond my limited purview. The idea that treating publishers like publishers will lead to the end of the Net and intellectual freedom is some nonsense, and the kind of nonsense that only techutopians can come up with.
