The Obscure New York Law That Could Dismantle Trump’s Empire
The New Yorker $ – A cornerstone of life online has been that platforms are not responsible for content posted by users. What happens if that immunity goes away?: “In February, the Supreme Court will hear two cases—Twitter v. Taamneh and Gonzalez v. Google—that could alter how the Internet is regulated, with potentially vast consequences. Both cases concern Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which grants legal immunity to Internet platforms for content posted by users. The plaintiffs in each case argue that platforms have violated federal antiterrorism statutes by allowing content to remain online. (There is a carve-out in Section 230 for content that breaks federal law.) Meanwhile, the Justices are deciding whether to hear two more cases—concerning laws in Texas and in Florida—about whether Internet providers can censor political content that they deem offensive or dangerous. The laws emerged from claims that providers were suppressing conservative voices. To talk about how these cases could change the Internet, I recently spoke by phone with Daphne Keller, who teaches at Stanford Law School and directs the program on platform regulation at Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center. (Until 2015, she worked as an associate general counsel at Google.) During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed what Section 230 actually does, different approaches the Court may take in interpreting the law, and why every form of regulation by platforms comes with unintended consequences…”
Immune Harm: Who to believe? Easy Chair
The Gig is Up, and It Feels Weird Ok Doomer. The deck: “The German Minister of Public Health just confirmed what scientists have been trying to tell the world about Covid.”
Self-injury, suicidality and eating disorder symptoms in young adults following COVID-19 lockdowns in Denmark Nature. “Our findings provide no support for the increase in self-injury, suicidality and symptoms of EDs after the lockdowns.”
The New York Times: “Your email address has become a digital bread crumb for companies to link your activity across sites. Here’s how you can limit this. When you browse the web, an increasing number of sites and apps are asking for a piece of basic information that you probably hand over without hesitation: your email address. It may seem harmless, but when you enter your email, you’re sharing a lot more than just that. I’m hoping this column, which includes some workarounds, persuades you to think twice before handing over your email address. First, it helps to know why companies want email addresses. To advertisers, web publishers and app makers, your email is important not just for contacting you.
It acts as a digital bread crumb for companies to link your activity across sites and apps to serve you relevant ads. If this all sounds familiar, that’s because it is. For decades, the digital advertising industry relied on invisible trackers planted inside websites and apps to follow our activities and then serve us targeted ads. There have been sweeping changes to this system in the past few years, including Apple’s release of a software feature in 2021 allowing iPhone users to block apps from tracking them and Google’s decision to prevent websites from using cookies, which follow people’s activities across sites, in its Chrome browser by 2024. Advertisers, web publishers and app makers now try to track people through other means — and one simple method is by asking for an email address. Imagine if an employee of a brick-and-mortar store asked for your name before you entered. An email address can be even more revealing, though, because it can be linked to other data, including where you went to school, the make and model of the car you drive, and your ethnicity.
[Note – beSpacfic uses opt-in email requests to deliver daily updates inclusive of 10 new daily links and abstracts. Since 2002 – no information is sold, repurposed or shared. My site is a solo research effort, and has been free since its founding. Readers support is much appreciated. Please help support my research using the Donate feature – much appreciated!]
For many years, the digital ad industry has compiled a profile on you based on the sites you visit on the web. Information about you used to be collected in covert ways, including the aforementioned cookies and invisible trackers planted inside apps. Now that more companies are blocking the use of those methods, new ad targeting techniques have emerged…”
Everyone Wants Your Email Address. Think Twice Before Sharing It. The New York Times
New:
- Alexander von Humboldt by Dalia Nassar.
- Aesthetic Experience by Antonia Peacocke.
- Stoicism by Marion Durand, Simon Shogry, and Dirk Baltzly.
Revised:
- Revolution by Allen Buchanan and Alexander Motchoulski.
- Determinables and Determinatesby Jessica Wilson.
- Colonialism by Margaret Kohn and Kavita Reddy.
- Donald Cary Williams by Keith Campbell, James Franklin, and Douglas Ehring.
IEP
- Substance by Ralph Weir.
- Pseudoscience and the Determination Problem by Massimo Pigliucci.
NDPR
- Analytical Essay on the Faculties of the Soul by Charles Bonnet is reviewed by John H. Zammito.
- Heidegger and the Problem of Phenomena by Fredrik Westerlund is reviewed by Jussi Backman.
- Epistemic Explanations: A Theory or Telic Normativity, and What it Explains by Ernest Sosa is reviewed by John Greco.
- Socrates on Self-Improvement: Knowledge, Virtue, and Happinessby Nicholas D. Smith is reviewed by Nicholas R. Baima.
- Hobbes and Political Contractarianism: Selected Writings by Susan Dimock, Claire Finkelstein, and Christopher W. Morris (eds.) is reviewed by Andrew I. Cohen.
- Thomas Aquinas on Virtue by Thomas M. Osborne, Jr. is reviewed by Rebecca K. DeYoung.
- Rational Deliberations: Selected Writings by David Gauthier is reviewed by Paul Hurley.
- An Introduction to Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion by Jon Stewart is reviewed by Reed Winegar.
1000-Word Philosophy ∅
Project Vox ∅
Recent Philosophy Book Reviews in Non-Academic Media
- The Last Writings of Thomas S. Kuhn: Incommensurability in Science by Bojana Mladenović is reviewed by Paul Dicken at Los Angeles Review of Books.
- In Praise of Failure by Costica Bradatan is reviewed at The Economist.
Open-Access Book Reviews in Academic Philosophy Journals
- The Right to Higher Education: A Political Theory by Christopher Martin is reviewed by Jennifer Morton in Ethics.
- Being You: A New Science of Consciousness by Anil Seth is reviewed by Mark Sprevak in Philosophical Psychology.
Compiled by Michael Glawson
BONUS: Or have philosophers read this comic, and then you can be pretty confident that they’re thinking (highlight afterwards):
