alt Hacker NewsI think you could finesse it by saying that on HN, the users submit the content and the users also determine (by voting) what is popular. Ycombinator doesn't promote or bury any particular post with their own algorithms; they don't exercise any editorial review or control. (I don't think that's exactly true today, but it could be).
But to the larger point, I would actuall agree that sites should "review and take responsibility for every comment and every post." They are the ones amplifying and distributing this content, why should they have zero responsibility for it?
Yes that would dramatically change what gets published online, but I think that would be a good thing.
Replies
And how do you think any other website decides what to recommend you, if not other users' actions? Remember the Netflix prize? The data set they gave you is how other people rated movies. You can absolutely build a recommendation system without manual input from the operator.
And HN absolutely does promote submissions at the moderators' discretion. The moderators sometimes give old but overlooked submissions a second chance, they also turn the flamewar detector on some stories that they think deserve more attention which effectively promotes them against users's will.
> They are the ones amplifying and distributing this content, why should they have zero responsibility for it?
If LinkedIn started allowing hardcore pornography, many of their advertisers would leave.
With that in mind, are you certain LinkedIn takes “no responsibility” for the content they distribute? It would seem they have a multimillion-dollar stake in the outcome of their efforts to shape their commercial product.
> users also determine (by voting) what is popular
The algorithm considers various other things such the ratio of votes to comments, age of the post etc.
Just compare how different the front page is to /active
> Ycombinator doesn't promote or bury any particular post with their own algorithms
Certain things do get put above the popular stuff if they're fresh enough and your account is deemed to be a taste setter.
> they don't exercise any editorial review or control.
They can decide things like overturning the flagging of a post or burying something even without the flag etc.
And on TikTok users vote what is popular by giving videos watch time. It is no different.
So do you think the same logic applies to ISPs? Should they be reviewing all the content that they allow to transit their network and ban you if you try to evade their controls by using uncrackable encryption because if they mess up and allow you to distribute copyrighted or defamatory material they will be held liable? Remember that section 230 was originally enacted to protect them from liability.