matthewmarkus

5 ms·

1.
Sam Altman Is an Unaligned Model(linkedin.com)
5 points by matthewmarkus 3y ago|0 comments
2.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Hmmm. No. In a "marketplace of ideas," each idea has a price. Some are held dear and others are viewed as worthless. Regardless, each idea is available to you, and to future generations, for consideration. What we see here is not
3.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
I don't think Big Tech is scared of little old me, the bully, LoL. My goal isn't to hurt Google/Twitter/YCombinator, but to interject some responsibility. That responsibility is coming as common law works through systems
4.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
A few notes: 1.) A and B are not my proposals; They're case law that has been preempted by C. 2.) Copyright falls under the DMCA, which pretty much follows A's procedures (i.e., a takedown notice model) even though the DMCA is a s
5.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Ha! Are you trying to defame me by calling me a liar? I've quoted you twice and paraphrased your argument once by saying that it "seems to be that CDA 230 doesn't matter." Perhaps that was an oversimplification; however,
6.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Let's say I post the following on a forum: "X is a rapist." (Where X is a private figure for simplification.) The nuance is as follows: A) Under Cubby without proactive moderation. The website is not liable for the above sp
7.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
You said, "Section 230 is just a way to shortcut litigation." And that, "There would be one case, it would go to the Supreme Court, and would reinforce the key components of Section 230." One of your sources says: No, th
8.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
No. There is a valley of nuance between Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc. [1] and Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. [2]. All of this nuance was being worked out in the courts via common law principles before Congress short-cir
9.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
"But Section 230 substantively protects more speech than the First Amendment, and the First Amendment will not adequately backfill any reductions in Section 230’s protections." — Your source, not mine (not that matters). Your argu
10.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
YouTube and the NYT are fundamentally different businesses BECAUSE of CDA 230. You're right that YouTube will exist as long as CDA 230 exists. However, if CDA 230 is ever repealed, YouTube will have to change as its business model is n
11.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Please read your citation: https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndlr_online/vol95/iss1/3/ Newspapers do not enjoy CDA 230 protection. They face actual liabilities and carry liability insurance, a cost. Without
12.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
I can address your articles, but they're at odds with one another. More specifically, the Harvard one claims CDA 230 is superfluous, while the Notre Dame one argues it is essential (to the internet as currently structured). I would say
13.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
I don't want to compel speech. I want to reattach a cost or liability to YouTube that was removed via state power. Remember, Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. "held that Prodigy was liable as the publisher of the co
14.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
The point of repealing section 230 is to end YouTube as we know it. Basically, YouTube becomes the Washington Post and can carry fully moderated content that it selects and publishes. YouTube's current business model only exists by leg
15.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
The libertarian stance would be to repeal CDA 230. I don't know any libertarians that prefer statutory law to common law. "Libertarians share a skepticism of authority and state power , but some libertarians diverge on the scope
16.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Maybe actors should take the same course hunters have to take. I'm not a hunter, but I took one for fun, and the first thing you learn is always to assume a gun is "hot" until you've checked it yourself. I'm pretty
17.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Yes, sure. But the point is that, under certain circumstances, the use of the key can exceed your level of authorization. Possession of the key isn't a get out of jail free card.
18.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
"If a landlord does not give notice to the tenants or enters for an unauthorized purpose, the landlord may be charged with trespassing" [1]. [1] https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/can-you-tres...
19.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
If the CFAA doesn't apply to sys admins working at the highest levels of authorization, it seems to be a useless law. Foreign actors can simply hire sys admins to access whatever they want, no need for hacking. I really do think the co
20.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
So, what about the Michael Thomas case? Does this verdict overturn his conviction? http://www.epspros.com/news-resources/news/2018/it-worker-lo... "Mr. Thomas challenged the verdict, arguing that his con
21.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
Yeah, I don't buy this line of argumentation. Suppose the locked room is an apartment and the person with a key is your landlord. I'm pretty sure he's not authorized to enter and do whatever. A plain reading of "authoriz
22.
by matthewmarkus 5y ago
The "problem" here is that a market for infrastructure bugs now exists. The birth of a market isn't a bad thing, though. Furthermore, the market hasn't created the bugs, but exposed them! This exposure is a net benefit t
23.
by matthewmarkus 6y ago
Yes, but many of those researchers rely upon tools supplied by the oligopoly to communicate. Plandemic is probably a stupid movie. I haven't seen it, so I cannot judge. Regardless, it has been scrubbed from Google Drive accounts by the
24.
by matthewmarkus 6y ago
This comment cannot be upvoted enough IMHO. This scandal is the medical science equivalent of Enron, and it could've easily been covered up in a world where a oligopoly determines the truth. I think the even bigger danger here is when
25.
by matthewmarkus 7y ago
It needs to be noted that the Sumatran rhino has been on the decline for thousands of years now: https://news.mongabay.com/2017/12/dna-analysis-shows-sumatra... While humans have no doubt accelerated their demise,
26.
by matthewmarkus 7y ago
A "class-based analysis" implies you don't care about the crime but the identity of the criminal. If so, then why the gnashing of teeth now? Wouldn't the logical conclusion of that analysis be that MIT should not take do
27.
by matthewmarkus 7y ago
Wokeness paradox (2013 Edition): Can Ito work toward the "inclusion of marginalized individuals" while simultaneously discriminating against those with criminal records? If Epstein hadn't recidivated, would Anand Giridharadas
28.
by matthewmarkus 7y ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmT0_hKSUrw
29.
by matthewmarkus 7y ago
Yes, this is another example of a dual-track justice system. Note how CIA officers aren't prosecuted for hacking the Senate [1, 2], but an activist is indicted for allegedly failing to decrypt some files. [1] https://www.mcc
30.
by matthewmarkus 9y ago
Science is not an identity, nor is it an institution. Science is a process. This article is about as far from science as you can get.

More ›