3 ms·
I agree that censorship is a short-sighted solution, but imo the bigger risk comes from the fact that social networks operate in a way that enables the loudest
by rpastuszak 6y ago
I agree that censorship is a short-sighted solution, but imo the bigger risk comes from the fact that social networks operate in a way that enables the loudest voices, increases polarisation/bias, thus creating a platform for misinformation and harm. It's a known (and well researched) phenomenon.
If anything, we're moving away from progress by wasting our brain power on giving voices to ideas that are proven to be harmful (think: M. Gove saying that "Britain has had enough experts", I'll skip the US president for the sake of brevity, or 5G, Covid conspiracies, it's tiresome). We need rebels, not idiots. Of course, it's not new.
> We fought a revolution to have the ability to think for ourselves.
When you say "we", who do you mean, specifically?
Who does "we" refer to and what would you mean by "them"? How old are you?
In almost every imaginable way you or I share more with an Iranian mullah or a fisherman living in Wuhan than the people who lived in Northern America at the end of the XVIII century.
- raxxorrax 6y agoI agree that social media doesn't promote the best voices, far from it. But that is a process that would get better with time. Censorship is certainly the wrong approach in any way and can get very dangerous.