I am resisting the urge to tweet a bunch about the leaked DSA draft, just in case something changes by tomorrow.
But let me just say there are no real surprises.
I'm seeing a lot of discussion of the rules for "very large" platforms. But if I'm understanding right, a lot of the DSA's major new process rules apply to any platform with more than 50 employees. That ought to entrench incumbents quite nicely.
I'm feeling better about not assuming the leaked #DSA was final, now that it's late afternoon Brussels time and the release and announcement have apparently been delayed while drafters... debate final details?? What???
That'll teach me to get up very early California time...
I just have to say... the people who first introduced me to the TOTALLY AMAZING 1944 OSS guide to workplace sabotage were Commission staffers. gutenberg.org/files/26184/pa…
Apparently something about the tips on making organizational work unproductive spoke to them. As it would to anyone who has tried to get things done amidst workplace politics.
"(1) Insist on doing everything through
"channels." Never permit short-cuts to be taken
in order to expedite decisions."
(3) When possible, refer all matters to
committees, for "further study and consideration." Attempt to make the committees as large
as possible — never less than five.
(4) Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently
as possible.
(5) Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions.
(6) Refer back to matters decided upon at
the last meeting and attempt to re-open the
question of the advisability of that decision.
(8) Be worried about the propriety of any
decision — raise the question of whether such
action as is contemplated lies within the jurisdiction of the group or whether it might conflict
with the policy of some higher echelon.
(b) Managers and Supervisors
...
(3) Do everything possible to delay the
delivery of orders. Even though parts of an order
may be ready beforehand, don't deliver it until
it is completely ready.
(10) To lower morale and with it, production, be pleasant to inefficient workers; give
them undeserved promotions. Discriminate
against efficient workers; complain unjustly
about their work.
(11) Hold conferences when there is more
critical work to be done
(12) Multiply paper work in plausible ways.
Start duplicate files.
(13) Multiply the procedures & clearances
involved in issuing instructions, pay checks, and
so on. See that three people have to approve
everything where one would do.
(14) Apply all regulations to the last letter
Anyhow, I am thinking of those Commission staffers and these workplace sabotage tips (which seem to track real world behavior of people in organizations to this day...) as we all await the DSA.
THE COMMISSION DRAFT DSA IS HERE: ec.europa.eu/info/sites/inf…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Daphne Keller

Daphne Keller Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @daphnehk

15 Dec
Assorted observations on the #DSA. These track my own interests, so if you want an overview, look elsewhere. (If I see one, I’ll add it to the thread though.) 1/
I’d like to see a chart showing which obligations apply to which platforms, particularly at the smaller end of the range. It looks to me like some very burdensome obligations are going to fall on some very small entities. 2/
I know there are some Commission slides showing the obligations at the giant (VLOP!) end of the range. But that small end needs some serious attention IMO. 3/
Read 27 tweets
16 Sep
In platform content regulation, operational logistics are everything. That’s cropping up, inevitably, as the EU copyright filter wars heat up again this fall. 1/
You may recall that Copyright Directive Article 17 “resolved” the tension between rightsholders’ and users’ rights by simply mandating the impossible: platforms must “prevent” infringing uploads while simultaneously “in no way affect[ing]” legitimate uses. 2/
No filter in the world can actually achieve both those things. Even filter vendors told the Commission that. infojustice.org/archives/41930 3/
Read 16 tweets
9 Sep
The contemporary equivalent of the Military Industrial Complex is the nexus of state and private platform power. We need a catchy phrase for that, and it needs sustained scrutiny. Things are getting ugly.
Thread 1/
The number of recent news stories about platform employees doing things to make governments happy, including disclosing user data and silencing (or declining to silence) online speech, is remarkable. And what gets reported is presumably just the tip of a very large iceberg. 2/
This @Wired piece about the Saudi royal family bribing Twitter employees to reveal logs data about dissidents and critics is mind-blowing. 3/ wired.com/story/mohammed…
Read 12 tweets
18 Aug
The postal service is America’s original all-access speech platform. Long may it thrive. washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/0…
It would be really fun to research and write about the postal service as a model of platform regulation. I even have some notes on point. But I’ll probably never get around to it, and have not systematically researched. So here are a few thoughts / some free association. 2/
There’s con law about when and how the govt can make the USPS exclude content. In Lamont, the S Ct struck down a law requiring it to block foreign propaganda mailings by default. Recipients could then opt IN to receive the mail, putting their name on a govt list to do so. 3/
Read 15 tweets
3 Aug
Everyone should be paying WAY more attention to GIFCT, the database platforms use to share information about terrorist content (or things that met someone’s definition of terrorist content, which is part of the issue). Here comes a thread. 1/
This is a good moment to pay attention because GIFCT is in the middle of overhauling its internal governance, and a lot of civil society groups are very vocally disappointed by the direction it’s taking. See this hrw.org/news/2020/07/3… or this blog.witness.org/2020/07/witnes… 2/
GIFCT is a big deal both because of what it specifically does (set rules for “violent extremist” speech, an important and very contested category) and because it is a model for future semi-private Internet governance. 3/
Read 29 tweets
25 Jun
A law regulating platform amplification of user content IS a law regulating speech. Smart people are wasting time having discussions that assume that problem away. 1/
You can’t escape First Amendment barriers (or international human rights law) just by shifting focus from “harmful content” to “the amplification of harmful content.” 2/
Most discussions I hear about this focus on making platforms demote / not amplify harmful content that is still, for better or worse, constitutionally protected speech. A law like that would have two First Amendment problems. 3/
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!