10 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2022
    1. Alas, lawmakers are way behind the curve on this, demanding new "online safety" rules that require firms to break E2E and block third-party de-enshittification tools: https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/online-safety-made-dangerous/ The online free speech debate is stupid because it has all the wrong focuses: Focusing on improving algorithms, not whether you can even get a feed of things you asked to see; Focusing on whether unsolicited messages are delivered, not whether solicited messages reach their readers; Focusing on algorithmic transparency, not whether you can opt out of the behavioral tracking that produces training data for algorithms; Focusing on whether platforms are policing their users well enough, not whether we can leave a platform without losing our important social, professional and personal ties; Focusing on whether the limits on our speech violate the First Amendment, rather than whether they are unfair: https://doctorow.medium.com/yes-its-censorship-2026c9edc0fd

      This list is particularly good.


      Proper regulation of end to end services would encourage the creation of filtering and other tools which would tend to benefit users rather than benefit the rent seeking of the corporations which own the pipes.

  2. Jan 2022
  3. Nov 2021
  4. Sep 2021
  5. Sep 2020
  6. Aug 2020
  7. Jul 2020
  8. Jan 2020
    1. That makes digital writing a potentially powerful lever for social good, allowing students to "actively participate in civic society and contribute to a vibrant, informed, and engaged community," as the ALA notes. It also makes digital writing a potentially dangerous tool—decisions about when and what to share online can have repercussions for a student's safety, privacy, and reputation.

      I love how digital literacy allows so many to have access to so much and to communicate easily with others. But there is a definite dark side to sharing in any digital format and many don't think about that.