• Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I see your angle now, I don’t think it would need to be more mass surveillance than it already is, but understand why enthusiasm for these hearings could be damped by that waryness.

    • ysjet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      We don’t need ‘slightly more’ or ‘the same amount’ of mass surveillance, we need drastically less.

      More to the point, there’s no actual guarantee that repealing section 230 will have it actually be replaced by anything, which would effectively kill free speech on the internet, if not actually kill the internet itself.

      • Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        if these platforms are not reigned (might as well spell it like that given their regning attitude) reined in, the internet will die anyway…just a few walled fiefdoms that will dominate all markets and public spheres in the world.

        • ysjet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          … You’re literally on lemmy right now. That’s as anti-walled garden fiefdom as you can get.

          • Gsus4@mander.xyzOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            How good for us enlightned ones who escaped the matrix. I guess the internet won’t die for us :/ problem solved.