As an erstwhile reddit user, I was dismayed by this past election cycle’s effect on the site. Reddit is a discussion forum site that lets users set up topic specific home pages where they can freely post links or text discussions. Other users vote up or down on a post to lead to a system of self-sorting that theoretically sifts between the wheat and chaff of a decentralized discussion.
Unfortunately, reddit relies on human moderation a bit too heavily. Each sub forum has a human moderation team of enthusiastic users who block or ban offensive posts. This was considered a necessity due to concerns about offensive or illegal content. However, moderation is used to uphold the quality of subforums. Over time, the reddit administration staff (the site was purchased by a major media conglomerate) began to ban entire subforums, hand pick moderators (so much for self-moderation), and also secretly ban users. These “shadowbans” involve users being able to post and view their own posts, but with other users unable to view these posts. There are also allegations of admins manipulating vote totals to control content.
The unfortunate consequence of this phenomenon is the bifurcation of reddit into highly politicized communities that instantly ban voices of dissent. It is nearly impossible to have a mature discussion there. On the other hand, places where there is less moderation – such as the “anarcho-capitalism” subforum – have been raided by highly motivated interest groups, crowding out other discussions (the ancap subforum is replete with “alt-right” advocates of racial oriented theories).
The experience with reddit has convinced me of the need for an internet discussion forum that is immune to manipulation from both ends. It should be immune to raids or bots (computerized users that grant artificial boosts to content). It should be immune to moderation by captured administrators. Can the blockchain provide such a forum?
Imagine using the blockchain to pass information around the web – pure bits of text data, pure information. From this foundation, apps could be developed (competitively) to present it in a format that is visually pleasing and easily navigated. Blocks of text data could include links to other content, so the service doesn’t have to look like it’s from the stone-aged 1990s.
Each post would be generated by a user who would also tag the post using a simple hashtag system. The user would be similar to a wallet as one associates with any standard cryptocurrency. The blockchain system would associate content with tags. Browsers would feature raw feeds associated with the tags. Because it’s a blockchain system, users would be verified. Over time, users could gain a reputation.
Included in the blockchain would be data which relates users to each other. The opinion of one user towards another would be included in that data. Up or down votes on posts would change these relationships.
Depending on the third party browser being used, a person could view content based on algorithms that consider the various ratings stored in the chain. A user could create lists of favored users and unfavored users. The system could also consider a user’s voting history. A user could customize these algorithms in the browser, or browsers could be designed to automatically provide a good experience. A user could select an algorithm that favors diversity, so that they read posts from networks of users with whom they’d normally disagree, or over which they normally have no visibility.
In the end, the data is stored in the chain and is universal and immune to moderation. It’s raw data. Then, third parties can develop competitive software solutions to make sense of that data. In fact, you could just visit a website rather than download software to access a browser of the blockchain. The website could access or add to the blockchain from its own servers, so many users could avoid the techy aspect altogether. Other users could use highly technical private software to access the same data and same discussion set.
Moderation and filtering of information would be generated by relying on decentralized voting and user preference networks. There would be zero top-down moderation, and the core data would be immune to manipulation from any quarter.
I think the world needs a basic free speech technology such as I’ve described as soon as possible. We’re nearing the end of free discussion in unmanipulated forums. So much for public discourse. And private discourse such as this on sites like the Libertarian Institute will only be available as long as the public will prevents the FCC and Congress from moderating the entire internet in the name of the public good. And frankly, we are only one “Cyber Pearl Harbor” away from that being a potential reality.
