Oooooh SNAP!!!

[randahl@mastodon.social]

Oooooh SNAP!!!

Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez of Spain:

“First, we will change the law in Spain to hold platform executives legally accountable for many infringements taking place on their sites. This means that CEOs of these tech platforms will face criminal liability […]
Second, we will turn algorithmic manipulation and amplification of illegal content into a new criminal offense. […]
spreading hate must come at a cost.”

Have a great weekend, Elon!

https://www.youtube.com/live/NElqgJ1aXFA?si=M52qiZYBt55KRamm

[jeppe@mastodon.social]

@randahl What will that do to Mastodon? What about smaller or larger, or personal instances that federate?

[ecomba@ruby.social]

@jeppe @randahl just a guess. If you allow that kind of content… should I continue?

[jeppe@mastodon.social]

@ecomba @randahl so if a small instance federates with another instance where something illegal is posted. What will happen then? The content will show up on the small instance. It will add some very hard moderation needs, which might eliminate small instances. Im absolutely not talking about allowing that stuff. Thats not what I wrote either.

[hyevans@mastodon.social]

@randahl

Unfortunate position of flag ...

[ecomba@ruby.social]

@jeppe @randahl I don’t acuse you of anything, nor did I imply. I was talking in a general sense. The federated nature of the fedi makes it a little muddier, that is very true. I still believe it’s a great move though. Some things will get harder, but as the saying goes, doing the right thing is more often than not harder.

[grumpydad@infosec.exchange]

@randahl This does not bode well for social media in general and the big platforms (Xitter, Meta, TikTok) in particular.
At least when it comes to a Spanish legal perspective...

[kimsj@mastodon.social]

@jeppe @randahl
Mastodon doesn’t use algorithms, so it should be safe. Bots that boost particular hashtags may be vulnerable, though.

[stuart@social.brainsys.com]

@jeppe @randahl

Depends on whether the law has a threshold of users or revenue. This is useful as the authorities don't have to mess around with minor players and concentrate on the real offenders.

His sign off remark might suggest just that.

Most Fediverse instances' rules exclude illegal content. It that is enforced with decent moderation then there should be no risk. This proposed law is targeted at no or poorly moderated servers.

[androcat@toot.cat]

@randahl Yup.

Platforms must be held accountable for any harmful content they promote - wheter through the retweets by the CEO or through algorithm.

If any user gets harmful contect as a "recommendation", that is on the platform, and it must be punishable.

[androcat@toot.cat]

@jeppe

You are on the poorly moderated flagship instance. Why do you worry about small instances?

Small instances are super-busy blocking crap that mastodon dot social allows in.

@ecomba @randahl

[jeppe@mastodon.social]

@androcat @ecomba @randahl What does that have to do with me worrying about small instances?

[jeppe@mastodon.social]

@stuart @randahl Would be good if it was based on revenue.

[jgivoni@mastodon.social]

@randahl "Algorithmic manipulation", ooooh, I like how they are thinking, that term should be on everybody's tongue!

[androcat@toot.cat]

@jeppe

You probably don't know much about what goes on in small instances.

They are very aware of the need to moderate. This is not a threat to them in any way.

But we can hope it's a threat to mastodon dot social, because maybe then they will start carrying their own weight.

@ecomba @randahl

[kleisli@mastodon.social]

@jeppe this will depend on how the law defines "algorithmic manipulation and amplification of illegal content" - but as mastodon doesn't have a content algorithm (unless you consider chronological listing an algorithm) I don't think this law will apply when an instance just shows illegal content that was posted on another instance. @randahl

[jgivoni@mastodon.social]

@randahl Just take the opportunity to repeal Article 6 of the Copyright Directive and make it illegal for providers to block users from using a service that extracts your feed from Facebook or X and show you only what you actually want to see.

[nicelymanifest@mastodon.social]

@randahl This is beyond brilliant. Maybe the start of backlash at often indulgently reckless natures of the powerful who have a chilling indifference towards those they adversely affect.

[lillavee@mastodon.social]

@randahl If the techbro pedophile club’s empire crumbles and ends, we will have cause for the first global holiday. Destroy them. Please.

[anikke@procial.tchncs.de]

@randahl@mastodon.social

I want to have this for the entiere EU.