X is suing California over social media content moderation law::X, the social media company previously known as Twitter, is suing the state of California over a law that requires companies to disclose details about their content moderation practices.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        What do you mean?

        Edit: Oh, you mean “if you have nothing to hide you won’t mind us spying” one? I couldn’t agree more if I tried!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -212 years ago

      How so is it not intrusive for the government to demand private shit it has no business asking for?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        92 years ago

        It’s not “private shit it has no business asking for”, it’s proof that social media platforms are upholding the special duties that come with the special privileges being the “public square” of the internet.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            82 years ago

            Yes there is, you can go to Speakers Corner, a literal public square, and talk about all kinds of nonsense, but if you bust out the Nazi regalia you’ll be shut down quick sharp by the old bill.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            72 years ago

            Yeah there is. It’s called public safety. The January 6th attempted coup was (poorly, but still) planned on Twitter, Facebook and Parler. If those three had been better moderated when it comes to hate speech and misinformation, the 9 people who died as a result of it would probably be alive today.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            52 years ago

            What is precisely unlimited about this? Should companies be able to keep whatever they want behind the curtain and we aren’t allowed to ask what it is?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -102 years ago

              You said that government business is whatever the government passes laws about, which literally gives the government unlimited justification to do anything and everything because, by definition, it’s the proper business of government under that standard.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                32 years ago

                It’s the job of the government to inspect and regulate businesses and this is a reasonable and frankly way overdue example of them doing exactly that. Nothing unreasonable about it and calling it unlimited intrusion or whatever makes you look like the dumbest of libertarians, which is REALLY saying something.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -102 years ago

                  No, it isn’t the purpose of government to just make demands of private businesses. It’s absolutely unreasonable for the government to do so with intent to censor

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    42 years ago

                    None of that is true. Go away if you the only thing you have to contribute is libertarian lies about basic accountability being tyranny.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    22 years ago

                    Governments make demands of private businesses all the time with things like workers rights, safety regulations, emissions standards, etc. We don’t live in a libertarian no holds barred corporate wonderland and we’re better for it as these businesses have long proved they can’t be trusted if left to their own devices.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            42 years ago

            Is that what they did or did they just create a narrowly defined law for a specific purpose?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              -82 years ago

              It doesn’t matter how narrow a law is if the government has no fucking place making that law