Techdirt is off for the holidays! We'll be back soon, and until then don't forget to 
Techdirt Podcast Episode 392: Platform Moderation Or Individual Control?
As decentralized social media experiments continue, we’re getting more and more opportunities to really understand the impact of decentralized systems and how they are received by users. Amy Zhang, Assistant Professor of Computer Science at the University of Washington, has been studying and thinking about these issues a lot, and this week she joins us on the podcast to discuss a recent paper and, in general, how users are faring in the world of decentralized social media and content moderation.
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: amy zhang, content moderation, decentralization, podcast, social media
Comments on “Techdirt Podcast Episode 392: Platform Moderation Or Individual Control?”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Bluesky is crap. Idk why you keep promoting it.
You’re forced to subscribe to their labelling service and they still run the only relay and app view and DID store which everyone uses.
They basically retain control over it, but just let other people have control on top of that.
Re:
Consider the context. That’s infinitely better than what Shitter has become.
Re: Re:
True. Better than the original Twitter as well, I would add.
But something like Nostr would be even better if it had ATProto’s labelling services.
I use fediverse currently. But I’m hoping one day it gets https://arcanican.is/primer/ap-decentralization.php and better individual control over moderation.
When Zhang talks about changing the code to allow different governance structures, what does she mean exactly?
Because I don’t see how alternative governance structures can work if the platform isn’t some kind of technically-decentralized protocol with cryptography instead of a centralized server with a few affordances for democracy built on top.
Political decentralization without technical decentralization is toothless. Because then a sysop can launch a coup with his sysop powers and end the democracy or whatever system you have built.