Techdirt Podcast Episode 367: Open Sourcing The Trust & Safety Toolkit
from the essential-tooling dept
The trust and safety conversation tends to focus on the huge platforms, and the millions of smaller websites (some still quite big!) get ignored. But those websites have trust and safety needs too, and they use a lot of different tools to meet them. Most of these tools are proprietary, but there’s a growing push to build more open source tooling for the purpose, which was discussed by Derek Slater in a recent Atlantic Council report. This week, Derek joins us on the podcast to talk about the problems that open source trust and safety tools can solve.
Follow the Techdirt Podcast on Soundcloud, subscribe via Apple Podcasts or Spotify, or grab the RSS feed. You can also keep up with all the latest episodes right here on Techdirt.
Filed Under: content moderation, derek slater, open source, podcast, trust & safety
Comments on “Techdirt Podcast Episode 367: Open Sourcing The Trust & Safety Toolkit”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
You spelled "censorship" wrong.
Seriously, speech is not violence, and silencing people doesn’t make you safe.
This is dystopian af.
Re:
I mean, if you weren’t an idiot, you’d learn that “trust & safety” work and tools is rarely, if ever, about “silencing” people. But you want to live in your fantasy world.
Re:
Again, Matthew.
If I can’t say “Hang Mike Pence”, you can’t either.
That’s legitimately part of the law.
That’s 18 U.S. Code § 871 – Threats against President and successors to the Presidency.
And that’s just the beginning.
Guess who was STILL Vice-President on Jan 6, 2020? Oh, that’s right, Mike Pence.
Unless you’re saying that anyone who doesn’t do what Trump says does not deserve rights.
Re: Re: erratum
I think you mean Jan 6, 2021. But as these comments are uneditable, it’s not something you could correct anyway.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
You can absolutely say “Hang Mike Pence”, you stupid fuck. It’s expressly political speech and could only ever be prosecuted if it was a legitimate threat or incitement which it basically never is.
You are horribly confused. And any state or federal law does not in fact override the 1A, though there are many which attempt to.
There are TONS of laws against supposed “threats”, “disparagement”, “obscenity” and basically NONE of them are applicable but in the most limited of circumstances.
None of which has anything to do with what we are talking about, because very little of the dissent MM is looking quash and lie to you about involves actual threats of any kind. You fucking moron.
Re: Re: Re:
Why do you always lie, Matthew. I don’t want to “quash dissent.” I am fine with idiots like you outing themselves as idiots.
What I want are better tools for people to protect themselves against scams and spam and the like. I’ve never ever supported “quashing dissent” and wouldn’t do so because it’s a stupid, counterproductive idea.
I know, I know, you’ve built up in your very limited brain the idea that my support for trust & safety efforts (which EVERY SITE NEEDS TO HAVE) is that I support taking content down. Except I don’t. I support the actual purpose of trust & safety to help deal with spam, scams, and illegal content.
It also requires better tools for managing interactions that get out of hand, not by silencing anyone, but by allowing people to manage situations themselves to protect themselves against abuse and harassment.
Again, I’ve been pretty fucking open about all of this forever. You’re just too fucking thick to understand it.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:2
Lol. Omg, lmao, no.
You literally lie constantly.
Oh, so it’s ok to quash it if it’s “disinformation”? Lol. Omg, lmao, no.
Good thing that’s so easy to define, amiright? Good thing we haven’t seen that rampantly abused in the last few years, amiright?
Yeah man, I’m sorry that I’m so “thick” that I just keep on calling you out for being a fucking liar. Maybe I’d be smarter if you stopped constantly lying.
Re: Re: Re:3
I literally just said I don’t think that it helps if disinformation is suppressed. So, I’m not sure why you’re pretending I said the opposite. I said I support them dealing with scams, spam, and illegal content (CSAM), and that suppressing disinfo is generally ineffective. Instead, I think that counterspeech is a better approach, as I’ve said for years.
That said, I do support the 1st amendment rights of every website to decide for themselves how they want to handle these issues, because unlike you, I believe in private property rights and the free market.
Re: Re: Re:3
Please enumerate every time you think Mike was lying and provide actual verifiable proof of it. If you can’t, guess who’s the liar?
You are as smart as you’ll ever be, just accept that fate.
Re: Re: Re:
Laws are NOT suggestions, you fucking Nazi.
They are the foundational bedrock of how we FUCKING OPERATE IN A COMMUNITY.
Same thing with TRUST AND SAFETY COMMITTEES.
Because if we don’t have laws, then guess what? You’d be dead. All the while simping for your Nazi leaders who’d GLEEFULLY toss you off a cliff for being TOO LOYAL.
If you seriously can’t even get that into your Nazi little head, then please, turn yourself in to the authorities, because you are a fucking security threat and probably a willing disinfo agent for the CHinese.