There have been proposals to revise CDA 230 that would keep civil immunity for smaller sites. The NTIA site has no such carveout, as all three of the experts I consulted pointed out to me.
FWIW, I see it as something more like the opposite of censorship--a way to ensure that insightful/informative/interesting/funny conversations happen less often, because the absence of effective moderation lets trolls and spammers overrun the forums where those discussions used to happen. See also, what happened to Usenet.
(Yes, I wrote that post. Thanks for the opportunity to dust off this account!)
Women leave interviewing.io roughly 7 times as often as men after they do badly in an interview. And the numbers for two bad interviews aren't much better.
Once you factor out interview data from both men and women who quit after one or two bad interviews, the disparity goes away entirely. So while the attrition numbers aren't great, I'm massively encouraged by the fact that at least in these findings, it's not about systemic bias against women or women being bad at computers or whatever. Rather, it's about women being bad at dusting themselves off after failing, which, despite everything, is probably a lot easier to fix.
Also the title here is particularly bad, but I guess it's part of the Science News Cycle
"An ounce of prevention is worth a ton of code." -- an anonymous programmer
