I sense a learned helplessness when it comes to these topics. To say that Meta should police these posts hints at the fact that there is no hope for rhetoric or persuasion and that people are not rational.
Have we completely given up on making a good counter argument instead of disallowing things to be said in the first place?
Suppressing speech has downsides (loss of trust, centralization). Allowing speech also has downsides (misinformation, instigation, hate). How do we decide which is the way forward?
Have we completely given up on making a good counter argument instead of disallowing things to be said in the first place?
Suppressing speech has downsides (loss of trust, centralization). Allowing speech also has downsides (misinformation, instigation, hate). How do we decide which is the way forward?