Post #3389959
2026-06-17 12:58 UTC
@gbsills@social.vivaldi.net @angusm@mastodon.social I mean, I don't think we are actually in agreement, because I wouldn't accept any of those solutions either. Deep fakes are not actually the problem, and giving people the ability to sabotage social media companies by publishing things they are liable for and getting them sued is acceptable either. They are a public space, and ought be moderated as a public space, as if it were a park or sidewalk. Restore the natural consequences of being an asshole.
Replies (1)
-
@gbsills@social.vivaldi.net 2026-06-17 13:34
@Newhereish@mastodon.social @angusm@mastodon.social Agreed but we should keep in mind that social media companies make money from controversy so they are not at all likely to police bad behavior unless they are published. For example, during the Sean Combs trial an incredible amount of AI slop depicting celebrities having sex Diddy garnered YouTube millions of page view. Clearly YouTube should police this sort of thing, but hey, millions of page views. I think the problem with the "public space" philosophy, which is well meaning, is ignores the fact that social media companies are not public and do not act in the public's interest. They act in their stock holder's financial interests.