[ezzzzz]

Although I am concerned about the 1A and big tech being the arbiters of it, it seems like such a system has yet to go to production (probably never will). I understand that there are technical, financial, and legal complexities that are much more nuanced than 'FB doesn't care, as long as they can profit from potentially dangerous content' and 'FB just wants to suppress any speech which doesn't align with their neo-liberal ideologies'.

What I find troubling is that, a system to find/flag radical/violent content likely exists within the auspices of the NSA. Despite the massive infringement of privacy that these systems create, it seems that they still can't prevent people from being 'radicalized' by content from the platforms that is designed to do exactly that. Furthermore, they couldn't (or didn't) do anything to actually prevent people from storming the Capital. This begs the question, does this massive surveillance state need to exist if it does not do the thing it is purported to do (find and suppress violence, prevent terrorist attacks, etc).

If the owners of the platforms have any conscience, unfortunately, it seems that the responsibility will be up to them. It's murky territory for sure, and you have to strike a balance between far reaching censorship (i.e. infringing of 1A) and allowing disinformation, hate speech, and calls to violence to spread like wild-fire (i.e. how we got into this mess in the first place). I hate to say it, but the older I get, the more something like 'the great firewall' of China seems to make more sense.

[agumonkey]

I don't think the NSA was engineered with internet / social networks scale though. But they were already failing in the 9/11 days soo..

[ezzzzz]

I mean, PRISM was a post 9/11 thing and yeah, Snowden's leaks directly noted Facebook, YouTube, etc. There is really no telling what exactly is out there, but we know the NSA has massive Data Centers and a massive budget. Basically, even the most personal private information about literally any citizen is just a FISA Warrant away. Things posted in a public forum are a cakewalk.

Maybe they aren't doing anything novel with this data, whatever, this is beside the point. The point is, we can't really count on the State to regulate this stuff, even though, you know, creating and enforcing laws is literally the reason the state exists...

IDK, I hesitantly have to side with big-tech on this, but this is a problem that the State either can't fix, or will not fix.

The internet is a wonderful thing, but it is also very dangerous. Having unfettered access to information, be it true or false, can wield some horrible side effects when such a large swath of the population lacks basic BS detection, critical-thinking and like, base level understanding of civics. Do we need a Vanguard? I wouldn't trust one coming from either side of the aisle in the current climate. Seems like 'censorship' from the platforms is the only viable solution I can see, but that can take a pretty dark turn. At least if it's a private company, you can always leave, create your own thing or find something else...for now.

[agumonkey]

Prism is the tool. But I assume that the paradigm is surveilling/fighting small groups not large mobs going slowly insane. But this is just a bedroom idea.