Mastodawn

ambroisie Feb 6

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

LIVE: Spain PM Pedro Sánchez Delivers Address at World Government Summit in Dubai | APT

YouTube

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

Enrique Comba Riepenhausen🇺🇦Feb 6

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

@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.

Enrique Comba Riepenhausen🇺🇦Feb 6

@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.

Alberto Ruiz Feb 6

@ecomba @jeppe @randahl It is rather simple, if a node in the federation allows or amplifies that type of content, you ban the node from the fediverse

@aruiz @ecomba @randahl as far as i know, each instance would have to ban
Which could put pressure on the moderation task for smaller instances.

Alberto Ruiz Feb 6

@jeppe @ecomba @randahl sounds fair to me that an instance moderator has to comply with reasonable accountability laws for infrastructure that shapes society at large

@ecomba @jeppe @randahl while I agree some things will get harder, I think part of the entire point of Mastodon and many other federated servers is that the content is not boosted algorithmically, but by users.

is best to have strong moderation, but unless the law is very sloppily written (a possibility, of course) I don't think it applies at all.

meanwhile hosting and boosting illegal content already has applicable laws (hence the adjective "illegal")

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

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

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

Reiner Jung 🇬🇱 🇺🇦 🇪🇺Feb 6

@jeppe @ecomba @randahl @androcat the effect will be small. Based on the news (there is no law right now), using algorithms to spread hate, will be illegal. Mastodon does not use such "algorithms" to push engagement. So here we would be fine. The other part is content moderation. We need to get better at that. Many smaller instances are better at that. Still we need maybe new ways to improve that. However, everyone can limit hate, by not boosting it. Thus, we are part of the solution.

And by reporting it.
And by muting or defederating from instances that won't listen.
There's a whole bunch of things that can be done.

But there are for sure small instances that are poorly moderated (for instance because the admin is a harasser) and these should in fact just be tossed out (defederated).

@jeppe @ecomba @randahl

Pino Carafa Feb 8

@androcat @prefec2 @jeppe @ecomba @randahl If the legislation is well written I would hope you'd be alright. I saw an interesting comparison the other day, that compared Mastodon to email. Email works because all mail servers share a protocol that allows users on any mail server to communicate with users on any other.

As a mail server admin you wouldn't be penalised if someone emailed unsolicited Nazi propaganda or child pornography TO one of your users. But if you allowed them to SEND it....

Mail providers aren't penalised for allowing users to send whatever crap either.

This is more akin to substack deciding to promote a nazi newsletter to a bunch of users.

That's promotion by the platform. Of course they have to be held accountable for that, even if some nazi asshole was the one who wrote the crap.

@prefec2 @jeppe @ecomba @randahl

Pino Carafa Feb 9

@androcat @prefec2 @jeppe @ecomba @randahl I'm sure owners of mail servers can hide behind a lot of legislation to avoid responsibility for letting people use their servers for nefarious purposes. But they may not get a total carte blanche either. There does seem to be SOME legislation in place, e.g. https://lawshun.com/article/can-spam-law-suits

Whether it's effective at all.... no idea.

Spam Lawsuit: Understanding The Can-Spam Act And Its Consequences | LawShun

Understand the CAN-SPAM Act and its legal implications. Learn about the law, its enforcement, and how it affects businesses and consumers in the digital age.

Androcat Feb 10

Yeah, I think the big deal is whether the server admin can know something is off.
Someone sending hundreds of thousands of emails - that's something they can know and should look into.

@prefec2 @jeppe @ecomba @randahl

Kim Spence-Jones 🇬🇧😷Feb 6

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

Till Kleisli Feb 6

@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

@jeppe This is Sanchez we're talking about so, goodbye to Masto.cat
He might be a Spanish centrist but is against everything catalan.

That's the problem with regulations, we cannot trust 'government officials' to respect opinions that don't agree with their world.

I am against fascism, but I'm a pro catalan independence, so PSOE would prefer that I shut up.

Molly in Missouri Feb 6

@jeppe @randahl federating with the likes of Facebook and twitter was always a losing proposition for mastodonians. Abusors abuse, and pretending the trade off for content was worth it was always crass and easily seen through. FOMO kills community, uncompromising prinicipal nurtures community. Needy attention seekers shouldn't be running the show, folks.

Unfortunate position of flag ...😜

GrumpyDad 🇺🇦🇵🇸Feb 6

@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...

Alexa Fontanilla Feb 6

@grumpydad
#PostOfTheWeek (season 3):
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez credited Morocco’s migration cooperation during a CNN interview at the World Governments Summit in Dubai, positioning the partnership as a template for European Union policy.

Alexa Fontanilla Feb 6

@grumpydad
Sánchez stated that close coordination with Rabat has “very significantly” reduced irregular arrivals on Spanish territory. He identified Morocco as an essential strategic partner in regional migration management, attributing migration flow control to joint engagement and coordination with origin and transit countries.

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.

🔹 Jakob Givoni Feb 6

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

@randahl
Wow wow wow! Watch this space! 😁

🔹 Jakob Givoni Feb 6

@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.

Neil Moffatt Feb 6

@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.

Anikke 🌻 🚴‍ 🇺🇦🇬🇱 ♀️ #ichbinantifa Feb 6

@randahl

I want to have this for the entiere EU.

JT Leskinen Feb 6

@randahl @niksii This is good, obviously. The only negative is the fact that they’re planning to ban social media from teens. So teens will be punished for the crimes of social media companies.

Niko-olio Feb 6

@milesizdead yeah, it is sad that politicians all over the world are morally panicking and banning social media from teen instead of keeping companies accountable for the problem like bad moderation etc. @randahl

@milesizdead @randahl @niksii

And it doesn't only punish the teens

"These restrictive mandates strike at the foundation of the free and open internet. They are tools of censorship [which] burden the expressive rights of adults and young people alike"

https://www.eff.org/issues/age-verification

Age Verification and Age Gating: Resource Hub

Age verification (or age-gating) laws generally require online services to check, estimate, or verify all users’ ages—often through invasive tools like ID checks, biometric scans, or other dubious “age estimation” methods—before granting them access to certain online content or services. Governments in the U.S. and around the world are increasingly adopting these restrictive measures in the name of protecting children online. But in practice, these systems create dangerous new forms of surveillance, censorship, and exclusion. Technologically, the age verification process can take many forms: collection and analysis of government ID, biometric scans, algorithmic or AI-based behavioral or user monitoring, digital ID, the list goes on. But no matter the method, every system demands users hand over sensitive and immutable personal information that links their offline identity to their online activity. Once that valuable data is collected, it can easily be leaked, hacked, or misused. (Indeed, we’ve already seen several breaches of age verification providers.) EFF has long warned against age-gating the internet. Age verification technology itself is often inaccurate and privacy-invasive. These restrictive mandates strike at the foundation of the free and open internet. They are tools of censorship, used to block people from viewing or sharing information that the government deems “harmful” or “offensive.” And they create surveillance systems that critically undermine online privacy, chill access to vital online communities and resources, and burden the expressive rights of adults and young people alike. EFF.org/Age: A Resource to Empower Users Age-gating mandates are reshaping the internet in ways that are invasive, dangerous, and deeply unnecessary. But users are not powerless! We can challenge these laws, protect our digital rights, and build a safer digital world for all internet users, no matter their ages. This resource hub is here to help—so explore, share, and join us in the fight for a better internet.

Electronic Frontier Foundation

@randahl - 1000% - Good charge him for peddling kiddie Porn.

Betterifyouneil Feb 6

♥️♥️♥️♥️♥️

Graeme 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿Feb 6

@randahl Yes! About time the shit platforms were held liable for content, like a publisher.

@randahl Sanchez is really fine

Chris_toph Feb 6

One can expect people in Spain will move to Mastodon and then it will become more popular.

Arma Bellum Feb 6

@randahl These are great (if unimplementable) measures, but kind of fall flat when the other side of this is they're going for age verification and signed a deal with Palantir for facial recognition tech.

Curicaca Flâneuse da Asa Norte Feb 6

@shaperOfDefiance @randahl when you think an European state is starting to enforce it's sovereignty...

Arma Bellum Feb 6

@arq_urb_sudaka Yeah, even the best case scenario doesn't look very good.
Even if they ditch the age verification thing and Palantir goes to shit soon, there's like one scenario where the legal project threads the needle perfectly, and about a hundred scenarios where the result is that the president of our National Footbal League can criminally charge foreigners, because they're hosted by the same company as a website where he thinks you can watch football for free.
@randahl

Bogdan Buduroiu Feb 6

@randahl people cheering this and taking the populist veneer hook line and sinker need to be reminded that European politicians are in for making some pretty unpopular decisions related to: pensions, growth, further taxing of the middle class to find ReArm. Clamping down on platforms and venues for critical evaluations of society is part of the playbook regarding ruling from a position of unpopularity

tunneltoast Feb 6

@randahl 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

What you call, leading by example!

This is what the EU should adopt.

Its not made so clear in the original post, but Sanchez plans to introduce age gating, and the E.U. definitely does not need more censorship, exclusion, identity theft, and handing over citizen's personal I.D.s and biometric data to foreign big tech companies! Spain is actually setting a very poor example here. But with countries like France and Denmark already doing the same, there is the danger the E.U. will move in this direction!

https://mastodon.social/@adamsaidsomething/116020559186143282

https://mastodon.social/@danielquinn/116024689741995144

Daniel Quinn Feb 6

@randahl this is dangerous rhetoric from someone who doesn't appear to understand the implications.

Banning young people from social media isolates them from those that might support them while handing your citizen's biometric data to foreign 3rd-parties for "verification" only creates a target for surveillance and identity theft.

I get he's coming from the right place, but he's talking like an MPAA lawyer, pear-clutching "for the children".

@randahl
💯 👍 🙏 👏 FINALLY some accountability for these monsters.

Olorin Henderson Feb 6

These are just comical, meaningless words, no? International law forbids this. We'll send emails to spam and letters to the shredder. Zero F given. Problem solved. 🙂

Out of Print Archive (meppi64)Feb 6

This really should be Europe wide thing.
It's way past due.

@randahl unfortunately he will be in the list of new axis of evil made up by the Broligarchy... Come next election hope he id prepared to fight them as well as his opposition.

Johan Barelds 🇪🇺Feb 6

@randahl
BRAVO Spain!!! 💪💪

Johan Barelds 🇪🇺Feb 6

@randahl
@bert_hubert Een mooie eerste regeringsraad voor het nieuwe kabinet Bert? 🤞

Hans van Zijst Feb 6

@Randahl Fink Excellent! Let's hope Brussels pays attention and copies this idea 👍

Tijgertje1987 Feb 6

@randahl
I hope that they don’t try to break the general rule of “notice and take down”

That “rule” protects hosters, sites with community content, etc

In short: the site/instance/server/etc owner has no liability for what the users put on it.
UNTIL they get notified on it.

randal_silversword Feb 6

@randahl I'm packing my luggage and heading for spain...

Looking for explanations…Feb 7

This is what governments need to do, not ineffective bans on children, which fail to deal with unmediated dangerous content, and isolate children who have managed to make positive connections on social media.

@Susan60 @randahl

So yeah about those ineffective bans on children...

https://gizmodo.com/spain-to-ban-under-16s-on-social-media-as-the-world-goes-all-in-on-age-verification-2000717515

Spain to Ban Under-16s on Social Media as the World Goes All in on Age Verification

Spain, Australia, and other countries are pushing social media age crackdowns to protect kids from the internet.

Gizmodo

Lstn2urmama 🇨🇦Feb 7

@randahl WONDERFUL FINALLY...someone is taking the bull by the horns !