We're sunsetting PodQuest on 2025-07-28. Thank you for your support!
Export Podcast Subscriptions
cover of episode The Internet Dilemma

The Internet Dilemma

2023/8/11
logo of podcast Radiolab

Radiolab
AI Deep Dive AI Chapters Transcript
People
C
Carrie Goldberg
C
Chris Cox
C
Chuck Epstein
E
Ellie Mistal
M
Matthew Herrick
S
Simon Adler
Topics
Matthew Herrick：由于Grindr平台上虚假个人资料的出现，导致持续的网络骚扰和现实生活中的威胁，严重影响了他的生活。他认为Section 230法案虽然存在缺陷，但对于互联网的正常运作至关重要，贸然废除会带来不可预测的严重后果。 Carrie Goldberg：作为专门处理网络恶意行为的律师，她认为Section 230法案保护了科技公司，使其免于为平台上的恶意行为负责，导致受害者难以获得法律救济。她强烈主张修改或废除该法案。 Ellie Mistal：她分析了Section 230法案的历史背景和现状，指出该法案在互联网早期发展中起到了关键作用，但如今已无法适应互联网的快速发展和变化，需要进行调整。她认为废除该法案可能导致两种极端结果：完全缺乏监管或过度监管，都将对互联网生态造成严重影响。 Chris Cox和Ron Wyden：作为Section 230法案的起草者，他们阐述了该法案的初衷和目的，即在保护言论自由的同时，避免互联网公司因用户发布的内容而承担无限责任。 Simon Adler：他总结了Section 230法案的复杂性和争议性，指出目前还没有找到一个完美的解决方案，废除该法案可能导致互联网生态的崩溃。 Chuck Epstein：作为早期互联网论坛的版主，他分享了自己处理网络恶意言论的经验，并解释了为什么需要对互联网内容进行一定的监管。 Matthew Herrick: 由于Grindr平台上的虚假个人资料，他遭受了持续的骚扰和威胁。尽管获得了保护令，但他仍然无法阻止前男友通过Grindr上的虚假资料持续骚扰他。他认为Section 230法案虽然存在缺陷，但对于互联网的正常运作至关重要，贸然废除会带来不可预测的严重后果。 Carrie Goldberg: 作为专门处理网络恶意行为的律师，她认为Section 230法案保护了科技公司，使其免于为平台上的恶意行为负责，导致受害者难以获得法律救济。她强烈主张修改或废除该法案，并分享了自己作为受害者的经历。 Ellie Mistal: 她分析了Section 230法案的历史背景和现状，指出该法案在互联网早期发展中起到了关键作用，但如今已无法适应互联网的快速发展和变化，需要进行调整。她认为废除该法案可能导致两种极端结果：完全缺乏监管或过度监管，都将对互联网生态造成严重影响。 Chris Cox和Ron Wyden: 作为Section 230法案的起草者，他们阐述了该法案的初衷和目的，即在保护言论自由的同时，避免互联网公司因用户发布的内容而承担无限责任。 Simon Adler: 他总结了Section 230法案的复杂性和争议性，指出目前还没有找到一个完美的解决方案，废除该法案可能导致互联网生态的崩溃。 Chuck Epstein: 作为早期互联网论坛的版主，他分享了自己处理网络恶意言论的经验，并解释了为什么需要对互联网内容进行一定的监管，以及早期互联网公司面临的法律困境。

Deep Dive

Chapters

Shownotes Transcript

Matthew Herrick was sitting on his stoop in Harlem when something weird happened. Then, it happened again. And again. It happened so many times that it became an absolute nightmare—a nightmare that haunted his life daily and flipped it completely upside down.

What stood between Matthew and help were 26 little words. These 26 words, known as Section 230, are the core of an Internet law that coats the tech industry in Teflon. No matter what happens, who gets hurt, or what harm is done, tech companies can’t be held responsible for the things that happen on their platforms. Section 230 affects the lives of an untold number of people like Matthew, and makes the Internet a far more ominous place for all of us. But also, in a strange twist, it’s what keeps the whole thing up and running in the first place.

Why do we have this law? And more importantly, why can’t we just delete it?

Special thanks to James Grimmelmann, Eric Goldman, Naomi Leeds, Jeff Kosseff, Carrie Goldberg, and Kashmir Hill.

EPISODE CREDITSReported by - Rachael CusickProduced by - Rachael Cusick and Simon Adlerwith mixing help from - Arianne WackFact-checking by - Natalie MiddletonEdited by - Pat Walters

EPISODE CITATIONS:

Articles:Kashmir Hill’s story) introduced us to Section 230.

Books: Jeff Kosseff’s book The Twenty-Six Words That Created the Internet) (https://zpr.io/8ara6vtQVTuK) is a fantastic biography of Section 230To read more about Carrie Goldberg’s work, head to her website) (https://www.cagoldberglaw.com/) or check out her bookcheck out her book Nobody's Victim) (https://zpr.io/Ra9mXtT9eNvb)).

Our newsletter comes out every Wednesday. It includes short essays, recommendations, and details about other ways to interact with the show. Sign up) (https://radiolab.org/newsletter)!

Radiolab is supported by listeners like you. Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab) (https://members.radiolab.org/) today.

Follow our show on Instagram), Twitter) and Facebook) @radiolab, and share your thoughts with us by emailing [email protected]).

Leadership support for Radiolab’s science programming is provided by the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, Science Sandbox, a Simons Foundation Initiative, and the John Templeton Foundation. Foundational support for Radiolab was provided by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.