3 ms·

Maybe not so contrarian here, but in general (USA centric - not American but I live here) On tech: - Social media companies should be legally responsible for

Maybe not so contrarian here, but in general (USA centric - not American but I live here) On tech: - Social media companies should be legally responsible for stopping mob justice and harassment on their platforms, since it would create financial incentive to make better tools and policies. - Social media companies shouldn't be responsible for censoring political speech (edit: by major politicians), that should be up to the government itself. On government: - Every citizen should be allowed to vote regardless of circumstance (i.e. even people in prison for heinous crimes), since I don't think the government should have much power over how it's elected. - The national debt isn't as big a deal as the media or politicians make it out to be, since the USA is primarily in debt to itself in its own currency. - Major government officials should be paid a lot more, and in return have major life long restrictions on what they are allowed to do financially both during and after their tenure. On life: - Veganism is the only moral choice for diet (non-vegetarian [so total hypocrite] here). I think we're going to learn an uncomfortable amount about animal cognition in the coming century, not to mention the climate impact.

matt_s 6y ago
Your two statements about social media appear to contradict each other. Harassment and bad tools (i.e. viral false info) are what political parties do/abuse on social media. I think social media shouldn't allow spreading of content beyond a couple degrees of separation, like a friend of a friend. The viral-ness would stop a lot of shenanigans but that would hurt their bottom line.
- mindvirus 6y ago
  That's a good idea too. Tricky though - for example an article on HN might get read by thousands but is it "viral"? For the second, I meant I would want to carve out an exception for major politicians, because I think it's dangerous for say Twitter to decide what the President can or cannot say (that's not what I wrote, but what I meant to write!). Instead I'd rather Congress decided and Twitter enforced those laws, if any.

matt_s 6y ago

Your two statements about social media appear to contradict each other. Harassment and bad tools (i.e. viral false info) are what political parties do/abuse on social media. I think social media shouldn't allow spreading of content beyond a couple degrees of separation, like a friend of a friend. The viral-ness would stop a lot of shenanigans but that would hurt their bottom line.

mindvirus 6y ago
That's a good idea too. Tricky though - for example an article on HN might get read by thousands but is it "viral"? For the second, I meant I would want to carve out an exception for major politicians, because I think it's dangerous for say Twitter to decide what the President can or cannot say (that's not what I wrote, but what I meant to write!). Instead I'd rather Congress decided and Twitter enforced those laws, if any.