Comment by flumpcakes

Comment by flumpcakes 4 hours ago

1 reply

> Yep, that's life, if something bothers you and it's already a crime then report it.

I think that's the issue with this, and why we are seeing new laws introduced.

If someone is assaulted in real life, the police can intervene.

If people are constantly assaulted at a premises, that premise can lose it's license (for example a pub or bar).

When moving to the online space, you are now potentially in contact with billions of people, and 'assaults' can be automated. You could send a dick pic to every woman on a platform for example.

At this point the normal policing, and normal 'crime', goes out of the window and becomes entirely unenforcable.

Hence we have these laws pushing this on to the platforms - you can't operate a platform that does not tackle abuse. And for the most part, most platforms know this and have tried to police this themselves, probably because they saw themselves more like 'pubs' in real life where people would interact in mostly good faith.

We've entered an age now of bad faith by default, every interaction is now framed as 'free speech', but they never receive the consequences. I have a feeling that's how the US has ended up with their current administration.

And now the tech platforms are sprinting towards the line of free speech absolutism and removing protections.

And now countries have to implement laws to solve issues that should have just been platform policy enforcement.

jpfromlondon 2 hours ago

Believe it or not, when a crime has been committed these providers universally defer to the police whose remit is enforcement, a role they seem reluctant to undertake, I'm unconvinced this is anything other than a convenient revenue stream, an opportunity to steer public opinion, and a means of quashing dissent.

Frankly, a few dick pics here and there seems wildly low-stakes for such expensive draconian authoritarianism.