undefined | Better HN

0 pointsslg3y ago0 comments

China is trying to control conversations as a means of controlling the population. That comes with its own problems that are unrelated to regulating speech.

>Would you be looking at criminalising lies and the spreading of them, even without knowing its a lie?

I don't know what you mean by this. We don't know whether a potentially defamatory statement is a lie or not until there is a trial. This would be no different. We don't need a Federal Truth Commission or anything. American society already seems satisfied letting a jury decide what is or is not a lie today.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

smcn3y ago· 1 in thread

So in effect you don't care about the issue and are content with how things are? I'm sorry, I'm not sure that I understand what stance you're taking. Misinformation is not an issue to you, would that be correct?

Requiring a trial to do anything about a lie on social media would mean that there would be no change. By the time the trial comes, the lie is old news and there is some new conspiracy taking grip.

That would be, essentially, meaningless. Not in any way, shape, or form preventative.

slgOP3y ago

If we lower the speed limit of every road in the country, the average speed of cars would drop even if we didn't increase the number of people we ticket for speeding.

We should change our laws to allow for more restrictions on purposeful lies that damage society. We shouldn't allow ExxonMobil to spend decades researching carbon emissions while knowingly lying about the conclusions of that research to the public. They should face repercussions for that as well as the people who knowingly spread that misinformation. I think that would be more effective than what you seem to be proposing which appears to be either limitations on recommendation algorithms or ad supported content.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse