That’s true, I didn’t use the word wrong, I only implied it.
Sorry for the confusion.

Yes that’s all true. But it’s a seperate problem that’s happening anyway, 230 or otherwise.

Yes that’s why repealing is the wrong thing to do.
As I said amend it.

The Fediverse doesn’t have any black box algorithms that recommend content. With the flat repeal of 230 it would be in danger. With my amendment it wouldn’t.

I don’t know it for a fact, I just know it’s true, that Google collects and logs every byte of data that goes through its servers.

I never mentioned repeal and replace.
As I said, don’t repeal it, amend it.

Those who are harmed decide. 230 is about protecting companies from law suits filed by users.

The whole “end of free speech” issue comes not so much from the government sensor really (that’s still firmly restricted by the first amendment) but from companies themselves banning any content or accounts that might get them sued.

But if that risk is limited only to what they recommend outside a user’s direct boolean search and filters, they can still host content without concern. But they need to be sure they know and approve exactly what their algorithms are pushing onto people.

What crisis did capitalism have in the 60s & 70s?
I’ve never heard of that before.

As far as I know that was the best years this country has known. Top tax rates were ~90%. The middle class was larger and more prosperous than anytime before or since. We were making huge strides in science and tech, as well as social progress.

But the greedy NeoLiberals fealt that while things were good and getting better for almost everyone, they were being held back by all the taxes and regulations that helped the unworthy “poors” at their expense.

Section 230 doesn’t need to be repealed, it only needs to be amended.

It basically says that online platforms can’t be held liable for the content their users post.

However that was put in place before black box algorithms were put in charge of peoples feeds, and literally hacking our brains to keep us outraged, afraid, and engaged.

It needs to be amended to hold companies liable for content their algorithms recommend to people. It’s one thing to allow people to post whatever they want. That needs to preserved. But if a site "recommends " something that’s harmful, they should be held responsible for that recommendation.

I recently discovered ReviOS. I just did a clean re-install of Windows with it. And its been great for the last few days. No dumb bloatware or spyware. Though not so privacy crazy as to break things. Supposedly it’s changes can’t be rolled back with updates due to the techniques they use. We’ll see

That can work then. I might try it.

Yah. This doesn’t work if you are scrolling through several dozen apps in the app drawer. They all look too much alike.

But your saying Peertube should have all the forum functionality of Lemmy, and the endless short video scroll of Loops.

rgluilis suggested a generic server idea, where the media and experience differentiating is done at the client app level. That could work well. But that’s an entirely different concept and structure.

And that’s great! Everyone gets what they want. But suggesting Lemmy, Pixelfed, and Peertube, etc. should all try to do it the way Friendica does, is a bad idea.

So like a single ActivityPub instance that hosts all the data, but users can have a Pixelfed app, Lemmy app, etc. all connect to that one server and use it to give the experience they specifically provide.

That’s a cool idea. I can see how that would work.

Why would you follow the same accounts on multiple platforms?
Or do you mean one person who has accounts on multiple platforms?

I think you might be conflating two things. Right now the Fediverse largely looks like you just described. It’s in it’s infancy, trying to copy what it sees around it. Eventually it’ll become a rebellious teen and forge it’s on seperate identity. That’s inevitable. I wouldn’t worry about it.

It’s a very different thing though, saying all the apps need to integrate all the features and experience of every other app, so they’re all largely the same and there’s never a need to use more than one. That sounds like a terrible idea.

Is it?
Because that seems really dumb.

Why would any specific niche service want to duplicate the features and functions of every single other niche service? The whole point is to have different experiences and uses, that might be able to (however works for them) interoperate as they see fit.

It’s a terrible idea that they should all try to eventually do all the same everything.

When I read the headline without context, I thought casting directors were just casting actors unseen over the phone.
But this is worse.

The current Lemmy version is very customizable. I think it has seven basic types of views, which are further customizable how you like. You can kinda make it look like whatever you want.

I’ve tried those. They aren’t as good as YouTube Premium.