Re: How would "algorithmic choice" laws/regulations impact ActivityPub?

Does EU require the platform to offer third party moderation choices as the
Missouri law requires? I think that's what makes it difficult to execute.
Do you need to list the third parties? All of them? Just those that
the platform selects? In what order?

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 2:48 AM Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com>
wrote:

> This doesn't need to be hard. "Algorithmic choice" is already the law in
> the EU. Most fediverse services are already compliant, from what I can
> tell.
>
> https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj#d1e3257-1-1
>
> ----
>
> Article 27
>
> Recommender system transparency
>
> 1.   Providers of online platforms that use recommender systems shall
> set out in their terms and conditions, in plain and intelligible
> language, the main parameters used in their recommender systems, as well
> as any options for the recipients of the service to modify or influence
> those main parameters.
>
> 2.   The main parameters referred to in paragraph 1 shall explain why
> certain information is suggested to the recipient of the service. They
> shall include, at least:
>
> (a) the criteria which are most significant in determining the
> information suggested to the recipient of the service;
>
> (b) the reasons for the relative importance of those parameters.
>
> 3.   Where several options are available pursuant to paragraph 1 for
> recommender systems that determine the relative order of information
> presented to recipients of the service, providers of online platforms
> shall also make available a functionality that allows the recipient of
> the service to select and to modify at any time their preferred option.
> That functionality shall be directly and easily accessible from the
> specific section of the online platform’s online interface where the
> information is being prioritised.
>
> ----
>
> (94) The obligations on assessment and mitigation of risks should
> trigger, on a case-by-case basis, the need for providers of very large
> online platforms and of very large online search engines to assess and,
> where necessary, adjust the design of their recommender systems, for
> example by taking measures to prevent or minimise biases that lead to
> the discrimination of persons in vulnerable situations, in particular
> where such adjustment is in accordance with data protection law and when
> the information is personalised on the basis of special categories of
> personal data referred to in Article 9 of the Regulation (EU) 2016/679.
> In addition, and complementing the transparency obligations applicable
> to online platforms as regards their recommender systems, providers of
> very large online platforms and of very large online search engines
> should consistently ensure that recipients of their service enjoy
> alternative options which are not based on profiling, within the meaning
> of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, for the main parameters of their
> recommender systems. Such choices should be directly accessible from the
> online interface where the recommendations are presented.
>
> ----
>
> Best,
>         Federico
>
>