Amend Section 230 so that it does not apply to content that is served algorithmically. Social media companies can either allow us to select what content we want to see by giving us a chronological feed of the people/topics we follow or they can serve us content according to some algorithm designed to keep us on their platform longer. The former is neutral and deserves protection, but the latter is editorial. Once they take on that editorial role of deciding what content we see, they should become liable for the content they put in front of us.

▲

Manuel_D 30 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

So Hacker News should lose section 230 protection?

Because the content served here isn't served in chronological order. The front page takes votes into account and displays hotter posts higher in the feed.

▲

slg 9 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Technically sorting by timestamp is an "algorithm" too, so I was just speaking informally rather than drafting the exact language of a piece of legislation. I would define the categories as something like algorithms determined by direct proactive user decisions (following, upvoting, etc) versus algorithms that are determined by other factors (views, watch time, behavior by similar users, etc). Basically it should always be clear why you're being served what you're being served, either because the user chose to see it or because everyone is seeing it. No more nebulous black box algorithms that give every user an experience individually designed to keep them on the platform.

This will still impact HN because of stuff like the flame war downranker they use here. However, that doesn't automatically mean HN loses Section 230 protection. HN could respond by simplifying its ranking algorithm to maintain 230 protections.

▲

sleight42 19 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

And there's also moderator control?

Yup. Accountable.

	▲	Manuel_D 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		So to be clear, anything other than a 4chan-like unmoderated chronological feed results in loss of section 230 protection? Heck, even 4chan wouldn't qualify, because despite considerably looser content rules they still actually do perform moderation.

▲

ares623 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That’s the first reasonable take I’ve seen on this. Thanks for explaining it, I will use it for offline discussions on the subject. It’s been hard to explain.

▲

parineum 10 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Chronological is an algorithm

▲

FloorEgg 36 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This would be a huge step in the right direction.

▲

worik 27 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

They could use transparent adjustable algorithms

I would like to tweak my own feed