Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Well, all the stuff you listed is pretty much why it's great. It's almost the simplest thing that could possibly work

And that's all well and good, did recognize that, but then isn't it a bit disingenuous to present it as some sort of "real" solution in a thread about a communications technology that aims to cover much more? It's like arguing that Prometheus is the be-all end-all of monitoring, even though the remaining concerns still remain, and are just shoved aside to be some adjacent solution's problem.

> Lack of history means you aren't legally obligated to moderate history (because there is no history)

Is that actually right? Feels pretty suspect to me, you have to hold onto the data at least a little bit to transmit it to all connected clients, being a client-server protocol. I don't think this passes by the courts, not any more than holding onto a few dozen or a few minutes of logs in a non-persistent fashion (i.e. in-memory only) would.



It's not right, there's so many legal contradictions in their statement it's hilarious. And the cherry on the top is that they were recently banned from libera IRC.

"As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding."


> Is that actually right? Feels pretty suspect to me, you have to hold onto the data at least a little bit to transmit it to all connected clients, being a client-server protocol. I don't think this passes by the courts, not any more than holding onto a few dozen or a few minutes of logs in a non-persistent fashion (i.e. in-memory only) would.

It doesn't excuse failure to moderate the service at all, but if there is no chat history, you cannot be excepted to moderate it specifically. Basically, in any even remotely fair legal system, one cannot be excepted to delete something that doesn't exist in the first place.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: