Post

I wrote section 230 to protect the little guys and the upstarts like Bluesky. Repealing section 230 only helps Meta, Musk, and Donald Trump.

Don't you think we could tweak it to exclude black-box algorithmic social media feeds?

This change would specifically target Musk & Zuckerberg & Tiktok's ability to shape public opinion by making them liable for what their algorithms subjectively push to people.

I don't think Bluesky's selling feature nor driving content feed is via Discover, vs being the alternative to twitter. Either way, I think any sort of Discover/For You algorithm should have to be open-sourced or face liability claims.

Open-sourcing a feed-ranking algorithm communicates very little about how it actually works in practice or what its consequences are for the platform or users. If an algorithm is simple enough open-source does usefully reveal its behavior, then it also makes it much easier to game or manipulate.

The purpose of 230 was to free websites from responsibility for harmful 3rd party postings. It is what allows the algorithms to remain unchallenged and unexamined. If websites are responsible for postings, that is worse for X and Facebook and better for responsibly moderated Bluesky

That is… very wrong. 230 is to promote innovation, including in moderation, by not holding sites liable every time they got moderation wrong. Pre-230, the liability shield was not to moderate (can't be liable because they didn't look). Every "responsibly moderated" site *will* make errors.

Meta and Google have the lawyers and resources to continue hosting user-generated content, likely in a severely restricted manner, if liability shields are removed. Startups, including firms like Bluesky, do not, and it's a huge financial risk for investors. Bye-bye innovation.